All posts by Paul Morsink.

Gee

“On the situated/embodied view of the mind, humans think (and learn) best when they are have a clear goal and are taking an action whose outcome matters to them. Digital media, like video games, can put people in just this role, even in cases they could never experience in real life (e.g., being a firefly trying to attract another firefly). Books can do this, as well, of course, but their focus on content and not the reader’s own actions and decisions, makes it harder. It requires proactive empathic readers who are reading like ‘writers’ and ‘re-writing’ the texts in their minds.”

Gee, J. P. (2015). Three paradigms in reading (really literacy) research and digital media. In R. Spiro, M. DeSchryver, M. Hagerman, P. Morsink, & P. Thompson (Eds.), Reading at a crossroads? Disjunctures and continuities in current conceptions and practices (pp. 63-78). New York: Routledge.

Also see:
wredactor
advanced literacies

Hartman and Morsink

“When we look around, we see a 21st century reading landscape where (to continue with the metaphor of travel, roads, and crossroads) readers constantly find themselves at crossroads, facing a bewildering—or exhilarating—array of choices about what to read, how to read, what reading-assistive technologies to use, how to document or archive their reading, with whom to share their reading (synchronously or asynchronously), and how to (re)conceive the very idea of reading.”

Hartman, D. K., & Morsink, P. M. (2015). Reading at a million crossroads: Massively pluralized practices and conceptions of reading. In R. Spiro, M. DeSchryver, M. Hagerman, P. Morsink, & P. Thompson (Eds.), Reading at a crossroads? Disjunctures and continuities in current conceptions and practices (pp. 126-148). New York: Routledge.

Also see:
wreadactor

Coiro

“[A]s online readers construct their own navigational pathways through online text, they must be able to regulate their movement between (a) newer online search and evaluation processes that typically occur very rapidly across hundreds of short Internet texts and (b) less spontaneous, more traditional self-regulation strategies within longer text passages that require more time and effort (Coiro & Dobler, 2007). These complexities, then, introduce a new metacognitive regulatory strategy required to combat the motivation of efficiency and spontaneity in order to ultimately slow down and read for meaning….”

Coiro, J. (2015). Purposeful, critical, and flexible: Vital dimensions of online reading and learning. In R. Spiro, M. DeSchryver, M. Hagerman, P. Morsink, & P. Thompson (Eds.), Reading at a crossroads? Disjunctures and continuities in current conceptions and practices (pp. 92-110). New York: Routledge.

Also see:
uni-tasking
massively multiplying crossroads

 

 

Van den Broek and Kendeou

“Many aspects of the encountered information [on the web] need to be monitored and the effort of pursuing one’s standards of coherence simply may become too much. Yet because of the diversity of input, the need to maintain one’s standards of coherence is even stronger than in the reading of a single text. Without such standards the processing may become haphazard and result in a more associative than coherent representation of the encountered information.”

Van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P. (2015). Building coherence in web-based and other non-traditional reading environments: Cognitive opportunities and challenges. In R. Spiro, M. DeSchryver, M. Hagerman, P. Morsink, & P. Thompson (Eds.), Reading at a crossroads? Disjunctures and continuities in current conceptions and practices (pp. 275-290). New York: Routledge.

Also see:
metacognitive demands
uni-tasking

Alvermann and Sonenberg

“[C]oncepts such as multiliteracies, multimodal texts, and disciplinary-based reading instruction are changing our notion of what counts as reading and the teaching of reading. Though not paradigm shifts in the fullest sense, these changes are indicative of a time when anomalies, or misfits, within the existing paradigm create conditions for a potential, full-blown paradigm shift (Kuhn, 1970, 1996).”

Alvermann, D. E., & Sonenberg, J. L. (2015). “Now is the winter of our discontent”: Shakespeare, Kuhn, and instability in the field of reading education. In R. Spiro, M. DeSchryver, M. Hagerman, P. Morsink, & P. Thompson (Eds.), Reading at a crossroads? Disjunctures and continuities in current conceptions and practices (pp. 212-228). New York: Routledge.

Also see:
teleological divide
comprehension instruction
essential digital literacies

Harrison

“[W]ith much good will and a great deal of excitement on all sides, there [has been] not only a digital divide in schools, there [has been] also a teleological divide, an intentionality gap that divided schools, teachers, school leaders and policy makers; a lack of clarity and agreement about what the goals for bringing the Internet into schools should be. And that gap was as profound as it was unattended. [And] I want to … suggest that the teleological gap is still with us, that our goals [for technology in the classroom] are still fuzzy, and that they need to become more transparent, more discussed, more ethically textured and more coherent.”

Harrison, C. (2015). We’re closing the digital divide: Now let’s work on closing the teleological divide. In R. Spiro, M. DeSchryver, M. Hagerman, P. Morsink, & P. Thompson (Eds.), Reading at a crossroads? Disjunctures and continuities in current conceptions and practices (pp. 275-290). New York: Routledge.

Also see:
paradigm shift
comprehension instruction