Blogs Aprendizagem

This article was downloaded by: [B-on Consortium - 2007]
On: 27 February 2011

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 919435511]
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Literacy Research and Instruction

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t791817959
The Impact of Using Blogs on College Students' Reading Comprehension

and Learning Motivation
Hui-Yin Hsua; Shiangkwei Wanga
a
New York Institute of Technology, Westbury, New York
Online publication date: 15 December 2010
To cite this Article Hsu, Hui-Yin and Wang, Shiangkwei(2011) 'The Impact of Using Blogs on College Students' Reading
Comprehension and Learning Motivation', Literacy Research and Instruction, 50: 1, 68 — 88
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/19388070903509177
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19388070903509177
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Literacy Research and Instruction, 50: 68–88, 2011
Copyright © Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers
ISSN: 1938-8071 print / 1938-8063 online
DOI: 10.1080/19388070903509177
The Impact of Using Blogs on College Students’

Reading Comprehension and Learning Motivation
HUI-YIN HSU AND SHIANGKWEI WANG

New York Institute of Technology, Westbury, New York
Research studies on college reading have been emphasizing the effectiveness of instruction and the
correlation of reading performance to college success. Little research has been conducted regarding
college developmental readers’ preferences for using digital texts to communicate. The purpose of
this study is to investigate whether students’ reading level will improve if the students have the oppor-
Downloaded By: [B-on Consortium - 2007] At: 22:23 27 February 2011
tunity to use digital texts with a blogging tool. The researchers worked with 149 college students and
2 instructors to integrate blogs into developmental reading courses. The researchers collected and
analyzed both quantitative data and qualitative data. The results indicate that using blogs corre-
lated positively with higher retention rate. The article also describes challenges encountered in this
project, and suggests integration strategies for college reading instruction.
Keywords college reading, struggling readers, technology, motivation
Introduction
Young adults in the digital age devote more time to accessing digital-media information
than information from traditional printed texts. This change has been a factor correlated
with young adults’ negative reading achievement. The National Endowment for the Art’s
2007 report To Read or Not to Read (Office of Research and Analysis, NEA, 2007) pointed
out the fact that “younger Americans read less and read less well” (p. 5). In addition, “58%
of middle and high school students use other media while reading, such as TV, music,
computer, video games, and social networking tools” (p. 10). This habitual multitasking
behavior has contributed to these students’ short attention span and their reduced engage-
ment in sophisticated reading tasks. This type of phenomenon has also been associated
with the lower reading scores and the lower comprehension abilities of recent college stu-
dents. Statistics from the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics show that the reading scores of twelfth graders in 1992 (292) were significantly
higher than in 2008 (286),1 p < .01.
Sanoff (2006) surveyed approximately 1,100 U.S. college faculty members, and about
40% of them stated that college freshmen are not well prepared for college-level read-
ing and writing tasks. To respond to young adults’ eroding reading skills and to facilitate
their transition to successful college studies, many higher education institutions use read-
ing diagnostic assessments (placement tests) to determine whether or not first-year college
students have the needed reading skills to succeed in standard entry-level college courses.
Students who do not meet the criteria are usually placed in a college-level remedial reading
1 Scale
ranges from 0 to 500.
Address correspondence to Shiangkwei Wang, Ph.D., New York Institute of Technology, School of
Education, Northern Blvd., P.O. Box 8000, Old Westbury, NY 11568-8000. E-mail: skwang@nyit.edu
68
The Impact of Blogs on College Students 69
class or a college-level developmental reading class. Students in the developmental reading

class are considered to be underachieving students who usually demonstrate a lower
course-completion rate and higher test anxiety (Grimes, 1997). In the developmental read-
ing class, students learn various strategies and techniques to achieve academic success
through extensive reading and writing assignments.
Much research has investigated the instructional effectiveness of developmental read-
ing courses, including enhancing students’ metacognitive awareness (El-Hindi, 1996,
1997; Hodge, 1993), improving students’ study skills (Cavery, Mandeville, & Nicholson,
1995; Maloney, 2003; Simmons, 2006; Taraban et al., 1997), and examining factors (e.g.,
SAT verbal indicators, high school GPAs, instructional approaches) correlated with read-
ing and academic performance (college GPAs) (Cox, Friesner, & Khayum, 2003; Mealey,
1990; Simpson & Rush, 2003). However, little has been done to examine whether or not
developmental readers prefer interacting with digital texts, whether or not the readers
demonstrate superior comprehension skills through the use of dynamic new media tech-
nologies (Edyburn, 2007), whether or not reading in a multimedia environment requires
many different types of literacy skills (Leu, 2006), and whether or not college reading
professors are ready to adopt digital text in their courses. For the current study, we saw a
crucial need to examine how new media and online literacies affect young adults’ college
reading skills. Specifically, we sought to investigate two points of interest: first, whether
or not college developmental readers could better improve their reading skills and learn-
ing attitudes with digital texts; and second, how reading instructors perceive and respond
to the change of new media integration (a weblog in this case) into a college reading
course.
Literature Review
Definition of “New Literacies”

The evolving computer technology and broadband networks have reshaped not only peo-
ple’s life and cultural practices, but also the nature of literacy and literacy practices. As
more texts are presented in digital form and are multi-layered, more dimensions of skills
emerge in traditional reading and writing. The term “new literacies” (or “digital literacies,”
or “information and communication technology literacies”) describes literacy-related skills
needed in an interactive multimedia environment, such as retrieving and evaluating infor-
mation, comprehending information, and producing and publishing information through
online technologies. Today, students grow up with digital technology (Prensky, 2001), and
their life is surrounded by computers and new media (Buckingham, 2000). In response
to the challenges of the new-literacies implications, the New London Group (1996), a
gathering of literacy researchers, laid out the following advice: educators should conceptu-
alize curriculum and teaching pedagogies that cultivate students’ multi-literacies skills and
knowledge so that, in turn, the students can successfully access and create the evolving
language required in higher education and future workforces. Even though the fundamen-
tal principles of reading and writing have not changed, we ought to study the shift from
processing linear print text to processing multimodal texts (O’Brien & Scharber, 2008), for
example, comprehending and communicating ideas through digital texts, visual graphics,
videos, moving illustrations, audios, and even games. Leu, Kinzer, Coiro, and Cammack
(2004) argued that a person with new literacies can use digital technologies to “identify
questions, locate information, evaluate the information, synthesize information to answer
questions, and communicate the answers to others “(p. 1,572). Other research (Aviram
70 H.-Y. Hsu and S. Wang
& Eshet-Alkalai, 2006; Eshet-Alkalai, 2004) has suggested a framework to define “digi-
tal literacy” as photo-visual literacy, reproduction literacy, information literacy, branching
(hyperlink) literacy, and socio-emotional literacy. Drawn from the literature, the concep-
tions of new literacies rest on the use of technologies to retrieve, evaluate, comprehend,
produce, and communicate information in multimodal forms. Even though new-literacies
studies are relatively new in literacy-education research, many previous studies related to
media literacy and online multimedia technologies have contributed to the broader defi-
nition of “new literacies” (Hagood, 2003). In this study, our working concept of literacy
draws on a body of research that explores hypertext accompanied by supplementary images
and video materials, all resting on computer and network technologies.
New-Literacies Research in College Reading Education

Most studies responding to the many calls for new-literacies research in literacy and
reading education have dealt with K–12 reading contexts instead of college reading con-
texts. And most of the studies emphasize (1) learners’ application of information and
communication technologies (ICTs) to new-literacies practices and (2) the application’s
impact on learners’ motivation and interests. The results of these studies indicate that the
new-literacies practices (e.g., digital video production, online composing) engaged and
motivated students more so than did traditional literacy practices (Barone & Wright, 2008;
Chandler-Olcott & Mahar, 2003; Merchant, 2009; O’Brien, Beach, & Scharber, 2007;
Ranker, 2008). Other studies attempted to examine the impact of using new literacies
(making meaning from hypertexts, visual graphics, and audio) on learners’ reading and
writing performance. In an extensive in-depth review to examine the effectiveness of ICT
on K–12 students’ literacy learning, Andrews et al. (2007) and Torgerson and Zhu (2004)
concluded that the impact of technology on literacy learning remains unclear for various
reasons. Many of these studies (1) relied on students’ self-reported perception of technol-
ogy use and of literacy learning, (2) used small samples, (3) lacked comparison groups,
(4) conceptualized ICT differently, or (5) did not adopt standardized reading-assessment
instruments.
Shifts toward the use of new literacies to help readers consume and produce infor-
mation prompted us to ask the following question: How does college reading education
respond to today’s students who are familiar with and motivated by the digital technolo-
gies? In the midst of the literature, we retrieved only a handful of studies on use of new
literacies in college developmental reading classes, and this paucity is consistent with
the conclusion of a recent study that colleges and universities tend to privilege print-
based materials (Caverly, Peterson, Delaney, & Starks-Martin, 2008, p. 335). This field
of research has also yielded important findings on students’ positive attitudes toward the
application of ICTs to new-literacies practices. Falk-Ross (2002) focused on cultivating
college students’ new-literacies skills and strategies (Internet-research and information-
evaluation abilities) through a course’s reading and writing assignments, and found that
learners were more focused, critical, and productive in reading and writing after taking
this course. Larson (2008) reported her experience of using e-books, e-mail, discussion
boards, and online chats to facilitate undergraduate preservice teachers’ integration of
new-literacies skills into the teachers’ classes. Jolliffe and Harl (2008) studied the read-
ing and learning habits of 21 college freshmen, and concluded that students are more
motivated by and engaged with digital texts, especially for personal communication and
social networking. Simsek (2008) studied 30 students in an ICT-integrated reading-skills
course, and the students self-reported improved reading skills and positive attitudes toward
the application of ICTs in the reading course. Burgess (2009) examined 18 students in a
developmental reading class using discussion-board and chat-room features embedded in
WebCT to complete reading and writing activities. The results suggested that students’
reading engagement and critical-thinking skills were improved; however, it is unclear
whether or not the improvement stemmed from the use of those tools because the study
lacked a control group.
In attempting to transcend new literacies in reading contexts, the literature has framed
many different theoretical stances around this area of study. Green (Durrant & Green, 2000;
Green, 1988) proposed a 3D model, suggesting that educators should focus on three dimen-
sions of literacy-technology learning: operational, cultural, and critical dimensions. The
operational dimension concerns the competence of using a language system and operat-
ing computer and network technology to read and write; the cultural dimension involves
use of technologies to make meanings in authentic social contexts; the critical dimension
focuses on optimizing or assessing technology to support and exercise critical thinking.
Previous research has adopted this model as a framework or template for literacy and tech-
nology research (Beavis, 2004; Burnett, 2009; Nixon, 2003; Nixon & Kerin, 2001). Leu
and Kinzer (2000) argued that new types of strategies are necessary for instructors striving
to integrate new literacies into literacy curriculum. In these researchers’ arguments, stu-
dents should have the opportunity (1) to research information from multimedia sources in
addition to written-text sources, (2) to handle enhanced volumes of information, and (3) to
compose messages in both print and digital formats. Instructors should nurture students’
abilities to identify problems, retrieve and evaluate needed information, and share with oth-
ers proposed solutions in various formats. More important, it is imperative that instructors
adopt social-constructivist strategies to promote collaborative-learning experiences among
student peers and to improve their motivation.
We framed our study around Green’s 3D model, and Leu and Kinzer’s theoretical
stances. Specifically, we reviewed technology that allows instructors to practice new lit-
eracies in a developmental reading course and that allows students to collaborate with
one another in a social-networking environment. Among many ICTs such as blogs, wikis,
digital video, concept maps, and Google Earth, we chose blogs to exercise new literacies.
Use Blogs to Support College Reading Instruction

Blogs constitute a fast online publishing tool. Educators have been examining the oppor-
tunity to use blogs to support students’ personal reflection, to collect teaching resources,
to showcase students’ projects, or to establish communication channels among instruc-
tors and students. Although course-management systems such as Blackboard and Moodle
share a few functions, Wang and Hsu (2008) pointed out blogs’ distinguishing features:
blog entries can be set to private or open to the public, blog entries can be archived even
after the class is finished, blog entries can be cited or linked to by the public, and blog
entries can be categorized. Moreover, blogs allow instructors to invite students from other
classes or schools to participate in a given blog. With greater flexibility, blogging tools
offer a richer learning environment than traditional course-management systems.
In addition, the use of blogs enhances social interaction, providing a channel to build
a sense of community, to strengthen communication skills, and to write for a real audience.
Researchers have discovered that learners are more willing to write and are more engaged
in the writing process when using ICTs than when using conventional writing, with its
confined audience and limited interaction (Baker, Rozendal, & Whitenack, 2000; Ellison
& Wu, 2008; Hsu, Wang, & Comac, 2008; Kaplan, Rupley, Sparks, & Holcomb, 2007).
As blogging is a relatively new area of study, these studies are more anecdotal in nature,
addressing students’ self-reports based on the students’ perception of blog use, rather than
providing empirical evidence to discuss the impact of blogging on learning.
A few studies examining the use of blogs to facilitate college reading and writing have
yielded similar findings: weblog activities motivated students to write, to express opin-
ions freely, to interact with peers and instructors, and to become ethical writers (Ellison
& Wu, 2008; Jones & Nuhfer Halten, 2006; Pinkman & Gakuin, 2005; Stapleton, 2005).
Nicholson, Caverly, and Battle (2007) adopted blogging activities in a college develop-
mental reading course to scaffold students’ critical reading, thinking, and writing. Students
learned to form evidence-based arguments and express their opinions on their own blogs.
Students discussed contemporary issues and commented on each other’s articles. The
results showed a significant increase in students’ level of knowledge, interest in further
learning, and appreciation of academic development. Other than these studies, little has
been done to investigate the impact of weblogs on college students’ reading-learning
outcomes (Bernstein, 2004; Wilder & Merritt, 2004).
In an attempt to further understand the effect of blogging on college students’ reading

performance and learning motivation, we proposed this study wherein we have examined
the following research questions:
• Research question 1: Does the use of blogs affect participants’ reading performance
among college-level developmental-reading readers?
• Research question 2: Does the use of blogs affect participants’ learning motivation in a
developmental reading class?
• Research question 3: What factors affect participants’ reading performance?
• Research question 4: What is the instructors’ perception of integrating weblogs into a
developmental reading class?
Research Method
Participants
This study was conducted at a four-year university located in the northeastern United
States. Normally, in the fall semester, approximately 150 to 180 freshman students would
be required to enroll in the college developmental reading course after taking the placement
exam (COMPASS reading assessment). In fall 2008, we offered 9 sections of a develop-
mental reading course (College Reading Strategies) with 149 students, taught by 3 different
instructors, each teaching 3 sections. Of the 9 sections, 2 adopted blogging tools in class
and the remaining 7 did not; hence, there were 2 blogging groups versus 7 non-blogging
groups (Table 1). All three instructors were not considered as technology savvy. Instructors
A and B volunteered to participate in the study. They both adopted blogs in one of the sec-
tions they taught and retained a traditional teaching method in the remaining two sections.
Thus, a total of 40 participants used blogs as part of their assignments for extended learn-
ing, while the other 60 used traditional ways to finish their reading assignments, refraining
from using blogs (mean age =18.15 years). Instructor C did not participate in the project,
but the post-survey, GPA, and retention data from her classes were collected and used for
comparison purposes. The entire student population was approximately 80% Caucasian,
10% African American, and 10% Hispanic and Asian. Male students were 58.7% in the
control group, 52.5% in the experiment group; whereas female students were 41.3% in the
control group and 47.5% in the experiment group.
Table 1
Profile of participants
Instructor A Instructor B Instructor C Male Female n

Experiment 16 24 21 19 40
(Blog) (1 section) (1 section) (52.5%) (47.5%)
Control 27 33 49 64 45 109
(Non- (2 sections) (2 sections) (3 sections) (58.7%) (41.3%)
blogging) 43 57 49 149
Setting
The primary goal of the college developmental reading course is to enhance students’ abil-
ity to engage in strategic reading of extensive academic texts; that is, to help students
become effective and skillful readers who, using their own reading strategies, can discern
important from unimportant information, can select and interpret information from multi-
ple texts, can summarize texts, can generate and answer questions drawn from texts, and
can communicate texts’ ideas (Nist & Simpson, 2000). In general, instructors foster stu-
dents’ skills in applying various strategies to overcome college reading demands because
no single strategy is more effective than the others (Caverly, Nicholson, & Radcliffe, 2004).
At this institute, instructors provide intensive and direct instruction in reading and study
strategies needed for college and career success. They use the same textbook and adopt
various supplemental reading materials as needed. In the current study, instructors A and B
integrated a blogging system into their courses as a supplemental reading and writing tool.
The researchers worked closely with them to design the blogging activities aligned with
Green’s 3D “literacy-and-technology integration” model (Durrant & Green, 2000; Green
1988):
Regarding operational domains, we capitalized on instructors’ and students’ compe-
tence to use new network technology, to use blogs, and to read and write multi-modally.
Therefore, we worked with instructors and participant students (blogging groups) dur-
ing the first session on how they could establish their own blogs, compose and edit blog
entries, interact with peers and instructors through the commenting feature, and integrate
multimedia and hyperlinked elements into the blog entries. Regarding cultural domains,
we emphasized the integration of digital literacy in an authentic social context, the class-
room. The instructors used blogs as a supplemental tool with which participant students
could submit weekly assignments ranging from answering comprehension questions on
a textbook chapter to writing reflective essays on a current news event to commenting
on an assigned YouTube video clip. The instructors attempted to align blogging activities
with curriculum, with an emphasis on applying learned strategies to meaningful reading
and writing tasks in a socially mediated context. Regarding critical domains, we high-
lighted the importance of embedding critical-thinking skills in the blogging activities, in
which the instructors guided participant students to research and evaluate reliable Internet
resources, and to synthesize different standpoints in support of the students’ own argu-
ments. In addition, participant students were required to read their peers’ blog entries and
provide feedback on them every week.
Other than the integration of blogging activities, the instruction for both the treatment
groups (blogging) and the control groups (non-blogging) remained the same, including
the syllabi, textbook, and the weekly assignments. While the control groups submitted
weekly assignments in the form of hard copies or email attachments, the treatment groups
submitted weekly assignments in the form of personal blog entries, with the option of
integrating multimedia elements into the blog entries. The only difference was that the
treatment groups were required to read and comment on peers’ blog entries. For example,
a typical weekly assignment would require students to read an article, identify and organize
main ideas, and summarize or interpret the article as needed.
Data Collection and Analysis

In this study, we adopted parts of the MSLQ (Motivated Strategies for Learning
Questionnaire) developed by Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, and McKeachie (1991), and we
adopted the survey designed by Bernard, Brauer, Abrami, and Surkes (2004), to predict
students’ performance in an online course. On the basis of the MSLQ, Bernard’s survey,
and the literature review, we designed a Likert-Scale survey consisting of 31 questions,
divided into 4 factors: self-efficacy, confidence in prerequisite skills, self-directive and ini-
tiative, and interest in learning the subject. The survey was administered at the semester’s
beginning (pre-test) and at the semester’s end (post-test) in both groups. The pre-test con-
sists of the first 13 items on the survey, and the post-test consists of the complete 31 items.
To assess whether the items formed a reliable scale from the summed survey score, we
calculated reliability coefficients for each set of factors. The Cronbach’s alpha for the self-
efficacy scale was .96 (15 items); for the “confidence in prerequisite skills” scale, it was
.905 (6 items); for the “self-directive and initiative” scale, it was .817 (5 items); for the
“interest in learning the subject” scale, it was .854 (5 items). All were above the stan-
dard of 0.70. Overall, these subscales were considered to be reliable sets of items. At
the end of the semester, we collected students’ performance data for both groups, includ-
ing the pre- and post-reading scores (COMPASS), final course grades, and first-semester
GPAs.
We interviewed the two instructors to explore their perceptions of the motivational
difference between blogging and non-blogging groups, their perceptions of using blogs as
an e-portfolio, and their willingness to adopt new media in college developmental reading
classrooms. In the following spring semester, after the registration period, we collected all
participants’ registration-status data and calculated the retention rate.
Data Analysis
Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS software. An independent sample t-test served
to determine whether there was a significant difference between the two groups in terms
of reading performance, motivation, and retention rate; a paired t-test served to determine
the significant difference between pre-class reading scores and post-class reading scores;
a Pearson correlation analysis served to determine the relationship between factors. Our
analysis of the open-ended responses follows Miles and Huberman’s (1994) analysis model
for identifying themes from, in our study’s case, the instructor interviews. Two researchers
in our study examined and generated the themes independently, and compared findings
with each other to develop the final themes.
Findings
Effect of Blogging on Reading Performance

Both blogging groups’ and non-blogging groups’ high school GPAs, SAT verbal scores,
and pre-COMPASS reading scores were subjected to between-group comparisons before
the groups took part in this project. There is no significant difference regarding any of the
items. There was no significant difference regarding post-COMPASS reading scores, final
course grades, and first-year semester GPAs. There was no significant difference, regard-
ing the COMPASS reading scores, between blogging and non-blogging groups (Table 2).
Therefore, the findings supported hypothesis 1: the use of blogs in a developmental read-
ing class does not increase students’ reading performance (COMPASS reading score, final
course grade, and first-semester GPA).
The paired sample t-test demonstrated that students in both groups scored significantly
higher in the post-reading COMPASS test than in the pre-reading COMPASS test (Table 3),
which indicates that the developmental reading course improved students’ reading level
significantly.
Effect of Blogging on Learning Motivation (Pre & Post)

The survey results suggest that, in general, young adults are comfortable using technology
to communicate. Survey items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 demonstrate that the majority of the partic-
ipant students had strong confidence in using computers and the Internet to communicate
(mean = 4.3, 1 being the lowest and 5 the highest). Survey items 5, 7, 8, and 9 suggest that
participant students possessed relatively lower positive attitudes toward self-directive and
initiative (mean = 3.84). Survey items 10 to 13 provide evidence that participant students
believed that taking this class helped them overcome academic challenges (mean = 4.1).
Table 2
Performance measurements between groups
Performance measure Group Mean Standard dev. T-test

Before treatment
High school GPA Blog 81.3 5.2 –0.29
Non-blogging 81.7 6.4
SAT verbal score Blog 394.0 63.9 –1.03
Pre-COMPASS reading score Blog 63.4 14.8 –1.10
After treatment
Post-COMPASS reading score Blog 72.6 16.0 –0.73
Final course grade Blog 6.9 1.7 –0.97
First-semester GPA Blog 2.85 0.6 –0.57
Note: Blog group n = 40; control group n = 109.
Table 3
Performance measurements within groups (COMPASS reading score)
Group Mean T-test Sig. (.05 level)

Blog
Pre-test 63.4 –3.907∗∗ .000
Post-test 72.6
Non-blogging
Pre-test 65.9 –7.358∗∗ .000
Post-test 74.7
Note: ∗∗ = p < .01.
Table 4 demonstrates the pre- and post-survey difference, on items 1 to 13, between
blogging groups and non-blogging groups. There was no significant difference found in any
of the items between or within groups, which suggests that the two categories of student
groups possessed similar computer skills and attitudes toward the developmental reading
course before and after taking this class.
The paired sample t-test indicates that survey item 4’s score was significantly higher
(p < .05, t = 2.149 (39)) in the blogging groups, suggesting their post-participation gain
of confidence with computer-based written communication.
Effect of Blogging on Motivation (Post-Test)

Table 5 reveals that, for post-test survey items (14 to 31) on the independent sample
t-test, no significant difference emerged between the blogging groups and the non-blogging
groups. The two groups of participant students demonstrated similar learning motivation
toward taking this college developmental reading course.
Factors Affecting Performance

Table 6 presents correlations between measured factors and reading performance. The
four factors were all correlated with one another in the non-blogging groups, suggesting
a coherent four-factor structure that underlies the survey items. In the blogging groups,
post-COMPASS reading scores were positively correlated with the first-semester GPA
(r = .34, p < .05), and was negatively correlated with factor 1 “self-efficacy” (r = –.33,
p < .05) and with factor 4 “interest in learning the subject” (r = –.32, p < .05).
In the non-blogging groups, the post-COMPASS reading scores were not correlated
with any factors. Factor 3 “self-direction and initiative” was positively correlated with stu-
dents’ first-semester GPA (r = .34, p < .05). The result is consistent with a previous study’s
finding that the “self-direction and initiative” factor correlates with students’ achievement
(Bernard et al., 2004). High school GPAs were correlated with the first-semester GPAs in
the current study’s two groups (r = .382, p < .05 in the blogging groups; r = .503, p < .05
in the non-blogging groups), while SAT scores were correlated with post-reading scores in
the two groups (r = .654, p < .01 in the blogging groups; r = .342, p < .05 in the non-
blogging groups). The results are consistent with those of previous studies wherein high
school GPAs and SAT scores proved to be the best predictors for freshmen’s academic
success in college (Betts & Morrell, 1999; Cohn, Cohn, Balch, & Bradley, 2004).
Table 4
Independent sample t-test results (items 1 to 13) between and within the blogging groups
and the non-blogging groups
Mean Std. Dev. T-test
Non- Non- Non-

Blog blogging Blog blogging Blog Blogging
1. I am able to access the Pre 4.56 4.51 .68 .95 .78 1.53
Internet easily as Post 4.43 4.3 .71 .95
needed for my studies.
2. I am comfortable Pre 4.28 4.21 .88 .79 .53 −1.75
communicating Post 4.20 4.4 .82 .72
electronically.
3. I am willing to actively Pre 4.23 4.17 .77 .75 1.53 −1.0
communicate with my Post 3.98 4.28 .83 .74

classmates and
instructors
electronically.
4. I am comfortable with Pre 4.18 4.28 .78 .53 2.15 .163
computer-based
written Post 3.88 4.26 .99 .81
communication.
5. When it comes to Pre 3.68 3.85 1.0 .78 −.52 −.814
learning and studying, Post 3.75 3.96 1.0 .86
I am a self-directed
person.
6. I feel comfortable Pre 4.20 4.29 .72 .67 .25 −.868
composing text on a Post 4.18 4.38 .81 .72
computer.
7. In my studies, I am Pre 3.43 3.65 .87 .99 −1.42 −1.767
self-disciplined and Post 3.65 3.94 .98 1.1
find it easy to set aside
reading and homework
time.
8. I am able to manage Pre 3.83 4.04 .90 .84 −.17 .163
my study time Post 3.85 4.02 .80 .83
effectively and
efficiently to complete
assignments on time.
9. In my studies, I set Pre 3.83 4.18 .81 .68 −1.0 .306
goals for myself and Post 3.95 4.14 .71 .87
have a high degree of
initiative.
10. I think I will be able to Pre 4.15 4.22 .62 .73 .84 –.350
apply what I learn in Post 4.03 4.25 .89 .80
this course to other
courses.
(Continued)
Table 4
(Continued)
Mean Std. Dev. T-test
Non- Non- Non-

Blog blogging Blog blogging Blog Blogging
11. I think the course Pre 4.08 4.24 .83 .82 .0 .286
materials in this class Post 4.08 4.20 .76 .85
are useful for me.
12. I like the College Pre 3.93 3.9 .92 .73 1.14 −1.091
Reading Strategies Post 3.73 4.06 1.18 .90
course.
13. Understanding reading Pre 4.10 4.12 .84 .79 .90 −.711
strategies is very Post 3.98 4.22 .8 .86
important to me.
Note: 5 = strongly agree, 4 = agree, 3 = neutral, 2 = disagree, 1 = strongly disagree.
Retention Rate
The retention rate is based on students’ registration status (Table 7). Over the course of the
semester during which we conducted the study (fall 2008), 1 (2.5%) withdrawal from the
college took place in the blogging groups (n = 40); 15 (13.8%) withdrawals or inactive
statuses surfaced in the control group (n = 109). The Levene’s test results indicate that the
equal variances are not assumed (F = 18.922, p < .001). The t-test indicates that there was
a statistically significant difference between the control group and the experiment group
regarding retention rate, (t(147) = 2.963, p < .01). The retention rate of the blogging
groups (M = 1.98, SD = .158) was significantly higher than that of the traditional group
(M = 1.82, SD = .494). A comparison with the retention rate of the previous academic
year’s corresponding semester (fall 2007) reveals that 175 freshman students were enrolled
in the college reading course and that there were 27 (15.4%) withdrawals from the college
after their first semester.
Instructors’ Interviews
The instructors were interviewed before and after the study. After the implementation of
the blogging activities, the two instructors were interviewed independently for 40 minutes.
We observed similar themes emerge in the two interviews. Both of the instructors expressed
their fear at integrating blogs into a college developmental reading classroom for reasons
including unfamiliarity with the technology operations, lack of knowledge of appropriate
pedagogies, and concern about privacy issues. However, both of the instructors expressed
their continued interest in using blogs in their future classes.
Students’ Motivation
According to the instructors, students in the blogging groups established a stronger sense
of learning community and built a better rapport with peers than did the students in the
Table 5
Independent sample t-test (items 14 to 31) of the post-survey results (blogging vs.
non-blogging)
Mean Std. Dev.
Non- Non-
Blog blogging Blog Blogging T-test
14. Overall, I am satisfied 3.98 4.25 1.03 .83 −1.43
with the learning that
occurred in this course.
15. Overall, I am satisfied 3.95 4.30 .93 .94 −1.92
with how this course is
delivered.
16. I would recommend this 3.7 4.11 1.20 .92 −1.88
course to my friends.
17. I would take another ICT 3.23 3.55 1.0 1.0 −1.56
integrated course if it
were offered.
18. I feel more confident in 3.75 3.98 .95 .88 −1.24
succeeding in college
after having taken the
Reading Strategies class.
19. This class helped me 4.0 4.12 .91 .83 −0.69
improve my reading
skills.
20. This class has heightened 3.78 3.79 .97 .80 −0.08
my interest in reading.
21. I feel my vocabulary has 3.48 3.82 1.15 .83 −1.64
improved as a result of
taking this reading
method class.
22. I am very interested in the 3.58 3.96 1.06 .89 −1.97
content presented in this
course.
23. I think the writing 3.7 3.82 1.11 .89 −0.61
assignments motivated
me to study for this
reading course.
24. Overall, I am satisfied 3.95 4.21 .99 .82 −1.42
with the learning
environment created in
this course.
25. Working on student 3.75 3.93 .87 .86 −1.01
projects is easier in this
course than in other
courses.
(Continued)
Table 5
(Continued)
Mean Std. Dev.
Non- Non-
Blog blogging Blog Blogging T-test
26. I communicate well with 4.05 4.05 .85 .74 −0.02
my peers in this course.
27. I have learned new 4.03 4.25 1.02 .76 −1.22
reading strategies after
taking this course.
28. I could read fast enough 4.08 4.11 .86 .72 −0.19
to accomplish the tasks in
this reading course.
29. I needed some help for 3.13 3.04 1.31 1.21 0.35
full comprehension of the
instructor-issued texts.
30. I have learned a lot of 3.58 3.77 1.08 .85 −1.01
reading strategies from
my peers in this class.
31. I feel that my instructor 4.08 4.39 .92 .86 −1.71
has created an
environment that
encourages us to ask
questions.
non-blogging groups. The blogging students would use blogs to broach conversation topics
concerning, for example, assignments, school learning, and college life, as well as friends
and family. On the other hand, students in the non-blogging groups did not exhibit a sup-
portive relationship in class. They were less expressive and more distant from one another.
In terms of completing assignments, both of the groups demonstrated similar completion
rates and writing quality.
Perception of Using Blogs

Both of the instructors were impressed with blogs’ features that provided an easy way to
monitor students’ reading comprehension and organizational skills, to track students’ use
of reading tactics learned, to enhance students’ interaction, and to encourage students to
voice their opinions. In addition, the instructors indicated that blogs made it easy to inte-
grate multimedia elements into students’ reading assignments; indeed, the instructors were
afraid of embedding too many such elements in their assignments because the instructors,
themselves, were still learning how to use blogs. Some introversive students, who usually
do not feel comfortable expressing personal or extreme opinions in face-to-face classroom
discussions, tended in this study to discuss more controversial issues on blogs than in the
classroom. In this sense, blogs became an equalizer enabling all students to express what
they had comprehended and to voice their opinions outside the in-class discussions, where
Table 6
Correlations of factors
High First- Post-

school semester reading
SAT GPA GPA score F1 F2 F3
Blogging groups
High school .391∗
GPA
First-semester .241 .382∗
GPA
Post-reading .654∗∗ .346∗ .34∗
score
F1 −.242 −.219 −.1 −.33∗
F2 .201 .086 .22 .12 .22
F3 .037 .063 .08 −.01 .37∗ .44∗∗

F4 −.291 −.078 −.19 −.32∗ .79∗∗ .11 .37∗
Non-blogging
groups
High-school .320∗
GPA
First-semester .259 .503∗
GPA
Post-reading .342∗ .351∗ .21
score
F1 .034 −.074 .12 .18
F2 −.017 −.129 .01 .15 .6∗∗
F3 −.01 −.043 .34∗ .17 .71∗∗ .63∗∗
F4 −.005 .028 .19 .16 .78∗∗ .63∗∗ .74∗∗
Note: ∗ Factor 1= self-efficacy, factor 2 = confidence in prerequisite skills, factor 3 = self-directive
and initiative, factor 4 = interest in learning the subject; ∗∗ = p < .01.
Table 7
Between-group differences relative to retention rate
Group Mean T-test Sig. (.05 level)

Blog 1.98 2.96∗∗ .004
Non-blogging 1.82
Note: 0 = withdrawal, 1 = inactive, 2 = Continue; ∗∗ = p < .01.
several students usually dominated the conversations. More important, blogs extended dis-
cussion beyond the allotted time for classroom instruction. In sum, the instructors stated
that blogs constitute a great tool in that (1) they enable instructors to see how students’
prior knowledge and metacognitive awareness could affect their understanding and com-
munication of the same topics, and (2) they facilitate increased interaction among students.
Students in the blogging groups grew to know each other very well; in contrast, students
in other groups rarely had the same level of interaction with peers in the classroom. The
interaction on the blogs made the teaching more cohesive and made students more coopera-
tive in the classroom because the interaction yielded appealing student-generated materials
for discussion and learning. For instance, instructors would bring up a topic of discussion
based on a student’s writing, which would have been read and commented on by peers.
Although they were pleased with the advantages that blogs brought to their instruc-
tion and specifically to student learning motivation, the instructors believed that, in order
to improve students’ reading performance, the focus should be on the teaching of compre-
hension strategies that will eventually lead to students’ use of generative strategies across
the curriculum. In other words, even though they would like to use blogs continually as a
supplemental tool, they would not completely switch the instruction and learning to elec-
tronic forms. They still preferred to provide students hand-written feedback in hardcopy
form (i.e., on paper) for marking corrections and leaving private comments. In this case,
blogs allowed the instructors to provide comments addressing the major concepts of stu-
dent writings, but left the instructors with the option of printing out student assignments to
make specific corrections and comments.

With this project being the first time that each of the instructors used blogs, the
instructors exhibited stronger confidence in experimenting with blogs after the study.
They expressed their interest in devising various blogging activities that would serve
future classes and that might entail situations in which, for example, students would
conduct research on the Internet in their major areas, synthesize and communicate their
research findings through the blog entries mandatorily, and benefit from an emphasis on
multimedia-elements incorporation.
Participants’ Portfolio
All blogging students completed required assignments on their portfolio blogs. The
blogging students responded to contemporary issues including the relationship between
smokers and politically correct discrimination, the relationship between cell phones and
driving safety, beauty and body image in the media, campus violence, and the relationship
between employee rights and surveillance. The majority of the articles were within 200
words.
The two instructors differed from each other regarding their own approach to inter-
actions with students on their portfolio blogs (Table 8). Instructor A tended to promote
more student interaction, leaving an average of 1 comment on each portfolio blog. His
students actively interacted with one another through the blog commenting feature. Each
of them left an average of 26.3 comments on others’ blogs, and received an average of
Table 8
The use of commenting features by instructors and students
Average # of Average # of comments Average # of comments

comments left on students left on others’ students received on
students’ blog blogs their own blogs
Instructor A 1 26.3 29.8
Instructor B 6.8 10.8 17.1
31.8 comments from others. He liked to print out student assignments from their blogs and
make comments on their papers.
Instructor B used blogs to comment on all students’ assignments but did not require
students to do so. The interaction on her students’ blogs was less frequent, so that most
of the observable interaction took place in the face-to-face classroom. Students’ comments
tended to confirm or even to praise the authors’ opinions; some comments provided links.
In general, students left comments voluntarily. The number of comments left by
participant students was positively correlated with factor 3 (self-directive and initiative)
(r = .362, p < .05), suggesting that participants who were more self-directive in learning
tended to leave more comments on peers’ blogs.
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to explore the use of blogs in a college developmental read-
ing course to address the integration of new literacies into the traditional modes of literacy
teaching and learning. The first research question was “Does the use of blogs affect par-
ticipants’ reading performance among college-level developmental-reading readers?” In
general, students’ reading performance does not strengthen, in particular, students’ post-
COMPASS reading scores, reading performance, and first-semester GPA. Although the
post-COMPASS reading scores were significantly better than the pre-COMPASS scores,
the gain of scores in each of the two groups was similar statistically. Using blogs did not
lend an advantage to participant students’ reading performance.
The second research question was “Does the use of blogs affect participants’ learning
motivation in a developmental reading class?” Compared with the control group, the use
of blogs in the developmental reading class did not improve students’ learning motivation
(attitude survey). Both groups possessed similar learning motivation after taking this class.
Several minor phenomena were observed in the results. The blogging students, after par-
ticipating in this project, possessed stronger confidence when using a computer for written
communication, an observation that was not made in the control group.
The third indicator (retention rate) yielded the most surprising results in this study.
Only 1 blogging-group student (2.5%) withdrew from school in the following semester; in
other words, the retention rate was 97.5%. The number of withdrawals in the non-blogging
groups was 15 (13.8%), which made the retention rate 86.2%, similar to the statistic from
the previous fall semester. The interviews with the instructors provided substantial insight
into this phenomenon: the interaction among students in the blogging groups was much
greater than in the control group. Even though the blogging-group students’ majors were
diverse, the group’s blogging activities increased the members’ interaction and helped them
form a learning community in which they could make friends quickly and easily, offer
comfort and support to one another, exchange relatively private information about school
work and social life, and offer suggestions to deal with academic problems.
The third research question served to examine factors affecting participants’ reading
performance. In the blogging groups, students’ post-COMPASS reading scores were pos-
itively correlated with the first-semester GPA, a correlation suggesting that the students
could apply learned reading strategies to their major areas of learning, although the effect
was minor. None of the four factors in the survey were positively correlated with stu-
dents’ post-COMPASS reading scores. However, factor 3 “self-direction and initiative”
was positively correlated with students’ first-semester GPA in the control group.
The fourth research question served to investigate instructors’ perceptions of inte-
grating weblogs into a developmental reading class. The perceptions indicate that using
blogs had great advantages in creating a rapport among students, improving student inter-
action, encouraging individual students to articulate opinions, and providing instructors
more ideas with which to connect student reading and writing to the in-class discussion.
Regardless, these two experienced reading instructors remained faithful to traditional meth-
ods of teaching reading. Despite having participated in the training sessions on blog use,
the instructors’ perceptions of integrating technology into teaching and learning under-
went no fundamental change. Both a fear of using technology and an unfamiliarity with
corresponding pedagogies prevented the instructors from maximizing the function of blog-
ging. This is understandable because instructors were shouldering the course-evaluation
pressures. Once the instructors established an effective teaching approach, it became a
challenging task to require them to adopt different pedagogies. The two groups of students’
significantly improved their COMPASS reading scores—evidence supporting the conclu-
sion that the instructors’ teaching was effective. However, such evidence can become a
mental obstacle to the adoption of new literacies. Moreover, the instructors pointed out
that constantly reading textbooks and that working on assignments are more important
than using technology as a substitute for paper-based writing assignments. This belief
reflects their mindset wherein technology is a tool to complete reading and writing assign-
ments, not a tool to facilitate and practice new literacies skills. We do not suggest that
a different teaching approach is better than the traditional methods, but the adoption of
diverse innovative pedagogies is necessary for a successful media- or technology-saturated
classroom.
Conclusion
Professional development is essential to the integration of technology into the college read-
ing context and, therefore, should cover both technology skills and pedagogical training.
We successfully trained students to use blogs to create entries, but we did not success-
fully train instructors to integrate technology into teaching and learning. In retrospect, we
feel that we did not help the instructors overcome their legitimate fear of using technology,
although their comfort level with the blogging tool increased in tandem with their use of the
tool. Moreover, we did not sufficiently or adequately prepare their technology skills, and
consequently, there were problems with posting various materials that featured multime-
dia such as embedded video clips or pictures. We had to work with the instructors several
times to fix the problems. However, the complexity of posting codes on the blog seemed
to discourage the instructors from making further attempts at posting multimedia elements
in the blogging entries. This outcome suggests that our provision of pedagogical training
was insufficient or inadequate. A successful technology-integration plan must be supported
by sound pedagogies and technology. Developmental reading professors should recog-
nize the existing challenges posed by and faced by the underachieving college freshman,
should explore pedagogies that encourage students to improve their reading performance
through technology, should give students the opportunity to practice new-literacies skills,
and should devise various strategies for using multimedia resources that maintain students’
interest after the novelty of a given technology wears off.
The quantitative data in this study did not support the assumption that using blogs to
enhance new literacies in a college reading context can have a positive effect on students’
reading performance. In fact, the approach of mixing traditional teaching strategies with
blogging activities might dilute the latter’s effects on reading achievement. Blogging did
have a positive effect on students’ interaction with peers, and corresponded to an improved
retention rate in this study. Further, qualitative data strongly suggest that the blogging
activity enhanced students’ sense of community and strengthened classroom rapport. We

will continue to study the retention effects of blogging on college freshman students to
determine whether or not this effect repeats itself.
It is difficult to integrate technology into reading contexts without changing the curric-
ula. In general, reading instructors should carefully adopt multimedia-based or hyperlinked
reading materials, should develop writing or production processes that make use of ICT
features, should design activities to facilitate peer interaction, should establish a system
for the regular monitoring of students’ progress, and should develop assessment methods
to measure students’ new-literacies skills while ensuring that the students’ performance
meets rigorous standards. Moreover, the goal of college developmental reading courses is
to ensure that students overcome reading challenges and that students transfer their reading
skills to pertinent subject areas; for evident reasons, this two-fold goal places consider-
able pressure on reading teachers and discourages them from testing new technologies and
strategies insofar as the untested is often a risk of failure more than a promise of suc-
cess. This legitimate but counter-productive fear is surmountable by means of successful
technology integration, which requires collaboration between practitioners and researchers

who can examine each element in the integration process, who can develop sound strategies
for implementation, and who can design professional-development frameworks. In turn,
instructors can recognize the concept of new literacies, equip themselves with technology-
adaptable skills, and deliver the targeted content through technology to students in a college
developmental reading context.
Preparing students to practice new literacy skills has become an urgent issue because
young children today have more experience in accessing computers than young adults have.
Young children demonstrate expertise in reading on-screen texts (Bearne et al., 2007, p.11)
and can develop skills to use a variety of digital texts independently (Levy, 2009). It is the
educators’ obligation to be aware of young generations’ increasing confidence and skills in
using technology, and to explore pragmatic pedagogies and strategies that connect college
learning with students’ technology-saturated lives. In this way, our higher education sys-
tems will better prepare college students to succeed in the twenty-first-century workforces.
References
Andrews, R., Freeman, A., Hou, D., McCuinn, N., Robinson, A., & Zhu, J. (2007). The effectiveness
of information and communication technology on the learning of written English for 5- to 16-year-
olds. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 325–336.
Aviram, A., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2006). Towards a theory of digital literacy: Three scenarios for the
next steps. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. Retrieved February 10, 2009
from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Aharon_Aviram.htm
Baker, E. A., Rozenadl, M. S., & Whitenack, J. W. (2000). Audience awareness in a technology-rich
elementary classroom. Journal of Literacy research, 32(3), 395–322.
Barone, D., & Wright, T. E. (2008). Literacy instruction with digital and media technologies. Reading
Teacher, 62(4), 292–320.
Bearne, E., Clark, C., Johnson, A., Manford, P., Mottram, M., & Wolstencroft, H. (2007). Reading
on screen. Leicester: UKLA.
Beavis, C. (2004). Critical perspectives on curriculum and ICTs: The 3D model, literacy and
computer games. Interactive Educational Multimedia, 9, 77–88.
Bernard, R. M., Brauer, A., Abrami, P. C., & Surkes, M. (2004). The development of a questionnaire
for predicting online learning achievement. Distance Education, 25(1), 31–47.
Bernstein, M. (2004). Do weblogs improve writing? Retrieved on January 4, 2004, from
http://markbernstein.org/Jan0401.html#note_35302
Betts, J. R., & Morrell, D. (1999). The determinants of under graduate grade point average. Journal
of Human Resources, 34(2), 268–293.
Buckingham, D. (2000). After the death of childhood: Growing up in the age of electronic media.
Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Burgess, M. L. (2009). Using WebCT as a supplemental tool to enhance critical thinking and engage-
ment among developmental reading students. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 39(2),
9–33.
Burnett, C. (2009). Research into literacy and technology in primary classrooms: An exploration of
understandings generated by recent studies. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(1), 22–37.
Caverly, D. C., Manderville, T. P., & Nicholson, S. A. (1995). PLAN: A study-reading strategy for
informational text. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39(3), 190–199.
Caverly, D. C., Nicholson, S. A., & Radcliffe, R. (2004). The effectiveness of strategic reading
instruction for college developmental readers. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 35(1),
25–49.
Caverly, D. C., Peterson, C. L., Delaney, C. J., & Starks-Martin, G. A. (2008). Technology inte-
gration. In R. F. Flippo & D. C.Caverly (Eds.),Handbook of college reading and study strategy
research (2nd ed., pp. 314–350). New York: Routledge.

Chandler-Olcott, K., & Mahar, D. (2003). “Tech-savviness” meets multiliteracies: Exploring adoles-
cent girls’ technology-mediated literacy practices. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(3), 356–385.
Cohn, E., Cohn, S., Balch, D. C., & B. J. (2004). Determinants of undergraduate GPAs: SAT scores,
high-school GPA and high-school rank. Economics of Education Review, 23(6), 577–586.
Cox, S. R., Friesner, D. L., & Khayum, J. (2003). Do reading skills courses help underprepared
readers achieve academic success in college? Journal of College Reading and Learning, 33,
170–196.
Durrant, C., & Green, B. (2000). Literacy and the new technologies in school education: Meeting the
l(IT)eracy challenge? The Australian journal of Language and Literacy, 23(2), 89–108.
Edyburn, D. L. (2007). Technology-enhanced reading performance: Defining a research agenda.
Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1), 146–152.
EL-Hindi, A. E. (1996). Enhancing metacognitive awareness of college learners. Reading Horizons,
36(3), 214–230.
El-Hindi, A. E. (1997). Connecting reading and writing: College learners’ metacognitive awareness.
Journal of Developmental Education, 21(2), 10–19.
Ellison, N. B., & Wu, Y. (2008). Blogging in the classroom: A preliminary exploration of student atti-
tudes and impact on comprehension. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17(1),
99–122.
Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital
era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93–106.
Falk-Ross, F. C. (2002). Toward the new literacy: Changes in college students’ reading comprehen-
sion strategies following reading/writing projects. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(4),
278–288.
Green, B. (1988). Subject-specific literacy and school learning: A focus on writing. Australian
Journal of Education, 32, 156–179.
Grimes, S. K. (1997). Underprepared community college students: Characteristics, persistence, and
academic success. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 21(1), 47–57.
Hagood, M. C. (2003). New media and online literacies: No age left behind, Reading Research
Quarterly, 38(3), 386–413.
Hodge, E. A. (1993). The effects of metacognitive training on the reading comprehension and vocab-
ulary of at-risk college students. Research and Teaching in Developmental Education, 10(1),
31–42.
Hsu, H-.Y., Wang, S.-K., & Comac, L. (2008). Using audioblogs to assist English-language learning:
An investigation into student perception. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(2), 181–198.
Jolliffe, D. A., & Harl, A. (2008). Texts of our institutional lives: Studying the “reading transition”
from high school to college: What are our students reading and why? College English, 70(6),
599–617.
Jones, Z., & Nuhfer-Halten, B. (2006). Uses of blogs in L2 instruction. In M. L. Wilbur & C. M.
Cherry (Eds.), Languages for today’s world: Dimension 2006 (pp. 25–35). Valdosta, GA: Southern
Conference on Language Teaching.
Kaplan, D. S., Rupley, W. H., Sparks, J., & Holcomb, A. (2007). Comparing traditional journal writ-
ing with journal writing shared over e-mail list serves as tools for facilitating reflective thinking:
A study of preservice teachers. Journal of Literacy Research, 39(3), 357–387.
Larson, L. C. (2008). Electronic reading workshop: Beyond books with new literacies and instruc-
tional technologies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(2), 121–131.
Leu, D. (2006). The new literacies: Research on reading instruction with the Internet and other digital
technologies. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading
instruction (pp. 310–336). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Leu, D. J., & Kinzer, C. K. (2000). The convergence of literacy instruction with networked
technologies for information and communication, Reading Research Quarterly, 35(1), 108–127.
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 communication technologies. In R. Ruddell and N. Unrau
(Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading
Association. Retrieved February 7, 2009 from http://www.reading.org/downloads/publications/

books/bk502-54-Leu.pdf
Levy, R. (2009). ‘You have to understand words . . . but not read them’: Young children becoming
readers in a digital age. Journal of Research in Reading 32(1), 75–91.
Maloney, W. H. (2003). Connecting the texts of their lives to academic literacy: Creating success for
at-risk first-year college students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46(8), 664–673.
Mealey, D. L. (1990). Understanding the motivation problems of at-risk college students. Journal of
Reading, 33(8), 598–601.
Merchant, G. (2009). Literacy in virtual worlds. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(1), 38–56.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded source book: Qualitative data analysis (2 ed).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard
Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.
Nicholson, S. A., Caverly, D. C., & Battle, J. (2007, November). Using blogs to foster critical
thinking for underprepared college readers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the College
Reading and Learning Association. Portland, OR.
Nist, S. L., & Simpson, M. L. (2000). College studying. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson,
& R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (vol. 3, pp. 645–666). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Nixon, H. (2003). New research literacies for contemporary research into literacy and new media?
Reading Research Quarterly, 38(3), 407–413.
Nixon, H., & Kerin, R. (2001). Collaborative research into ICT and the literacy curriculum:
Expanding our repertoires of capabilities. Paper presented at the annual conference of the
Australian Association for Research in Education, Fremantle, WA, December 2–6. Retrieved April
20, 2009 from http://www.aare.edu.au/01pap/nix01095.htm
O’Brien, D. G., Beach, R., & Scharber, C. (2007). “Struggling” middle schoolers: Engagement and
literate competence in a reading writing intervention class. Reading Psychology, 28(1), 51–73.
O’Brien, D., & Scharber, C. (2008). Digital literacies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(1),
66–98.
Office of Research & Analysis, National Endowment for the Arts. (2007). To read or not to read: A
question of national consequence. Retrieved January 31, 2009 from http://www.nea.gov/research/
toread.pdf
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of
the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). National Center for Research to
Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Pinkman, K., & Gakuin, K. (2005). Using blogs in the foreign language classroom: Encouraging
learner independence. The JALT CALL Journal, 1(1), 12–24.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5). Retrieved February
8, 2009 from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20
Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf
Ranker, J. (2008). Making meaning on the screen: Digital video production about the Dominican
Republic. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(5), 410–422.
Sanoff, A. P. (2006). What professors and teachers think: A perception gap over students’
preparation. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(27). Retrieved February 1, 2009 from
http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i27/27b00901.htm
Simsek, C. S. S. (2008). Students’ attitudes towards integration of ICTs in a reading course: A case
in Turkey. Computers & Education, 51(1), 200–211.
Simmons, M. (2006). Effective study skills for post-secondary education. College Quarterly, 9(2).
Retrieved May 3, 2009 from http://www.collegequarterly.ca/2006-vol09-num02-spring/simmons.
html
Simpson, M. L., & Rush, L. (2003). College students’ beliefs, strategy employment, transfer, and
academic performance: An examination across three academic disciplines. Journal of College
Reading and Learning, 33, 146–156.
Stapleton, P. (2005). Using the web as a research source: Implications for L2 academic writing. The
Modern Language Journal, 89(2), 177–189.
Taraban, R., Becton, S. M., Shufeldt, M., Stirling, T., Johnson, M. C., & Childers, K. (1997).
Developing underprepared college students’ question-answering skill. Journal of Developmental
Education, 21(1), 20–26.
Torgerson, C. J., and Zhu, D. (2004). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness
of ICT on literacy learning in English, 5-16. In R. Andrews (Ed.), The impact of ICT on literacy
education. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Wang, S.-K., & Hsu, H.-Y. (2008). Reflection from using blogs to expand in-class discussion. Tech
Trend, 52(3), 81–85.
Whipple, M. (1998). Let’s go to the movies: Rethinking the role of film in the elementary classroom.
Language Arts, 76(2), 144–150.
Wilder, H., & Merritt, T. (2004). Weblogs in language arts instruction. Society for Information
Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2004(1), 3969–3973.

Blogs Aprendizagem

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Blogs Aprendizagem

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

This article was downloaded by: [B-on Consortium - 2007]

On: 27 February 2011

Literacy Research and Instruction

The Impact of Using Blogs on College Students' Reading Comprehension

Online publication date: 15 December 2010

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

The Impact of Using Blogs on College Students’

HUI-YIN HSU AND SHIANGKWEI WANG

Keywords college reading, struggling readers, technology, motivation

class or a college-level developmental reading class. Students in the developmental reading

Definition of “New Literacies”

New-Literacies Research in College Reading Education

Use Blogs to Support College Reading Instruction

In an attempt to further understand the effect of blogging on college students’ reading

Instructor A Instructor B Instructor C Male Female n

Data Collection and Analysis

Effect of Blogging on Reading Performance

Effect of Blogging on Learning Motivation (Pre & Post)

Performance measure Group Mean Standard dev. T-test

Group Mean T-test Sig. (.05 level)

Effect of Blogging on Motivation (Post-Test)

Factors Affecting Performance

Mean Std. Dev. T-test

Non- Non- Non-

communicate with my Post 3.98 4.28 .83 .74

Mean Std. Dev. T-test

Non- Non- Non-

Note: 5 = strongly agree, 4 = agree, 3 = neutral, 2 = disagree, 1 = strongly disagree.

Mean Std. Dev.

Mean Std. Dev.

Perception of Using Blogs

High First- Post-

F3 .037 .063 .08 −.01 .37∗ .44∗∗

Group Mean T-test Sig. (.05 level)

make specific corrections and comments.

Average # of Average # of comments Average # of comments

activity enhanced students’ sense of community and strengthened classroom rapport. We

technology integration, which requires collaboration between practitioners and researchers

research (2nd ed., pp. 314–350). New York: Routledge.

Association. Retrieved February 7, 2009 from http://www.reading.org/downloads/publications/

Você também pode gostar