How the Quality of Annotation Influences Academic Reading: An Eye-Tracking Study

IF 5.1 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Lishan Zhang, Lili Liu, Shuwen Wang, Min Xu, Sixv Zhang, Yun Tang
{"title":"How the Quality of Annotation Influences Academic Reading: An Eye-Tracking Study","authors":"Lishan Zhang,&nbsp;Lili Liu,&nbsp;Shuwen Wang,&nbsp;Min Xu,&nbsp;Sixv Zhang,&nbsp;Yun Tang","doi":"10.1111/jcal.70062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Collaborative reading can facilitate students’ understanding of complex learning materials. High-quality annotations provided by peer learners are essential for successful collaborative reading. However, it remains to be understood how annotation quality affects reading comprehension.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>A simulated collaborative reading environment was constructed for interactive highlighting and commenting. The environment was used to conduct a laboratory experiment and examine the benefits of reading annotations by others.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Forty-seven college students participated in the study and were randomly assigned to two conditions. The constructive annotation group was provided with annotations containing information that pertained to the constructive level of cognitive processing, while the active annotation group was supplied with annotations containing information that pertained to the active level of cognitive processing. Pre- and post-tests were used to measure learning gains. System log files and eye-tracking data were analysed to compare and contrast the differences in underlying processing.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results and Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The results showed that constructive and active annotations incurred different reading patterns, with the constructive annotations attracting more attention than the active annotations. The results implied that instructors could use seed annotations of a constructive level in reading assignments to facilitate reading comprehension.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","volume":"41 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.70062","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Collaborative reading can facilitate students’ understanding of complex learning materials. High-quality annotations provided by peer learners are essential for successful collaborative reading. However, it remains to be understood how annotation quality affects reading comprehension.

Objectives

A simulated collaborative reading environment was constructed for interactive highlighting and commenting. The environment was used to conduct a laboratory experiment and examine the benefits of reading annotations by others.

Methods

Forty-seven college students participated in the study and were randomly assigned to two conditions. The constructive annotation group was provided with annotations containing information that pertained to the constructive level of cognitive processing, while the active annotation group was supplied with annotations containing information that pertained to the active level of cognitive processing. Pre- and post-tests were used to measure learning gains. System log files and eye-tracking data were analysed to compare and contrast the differences in underlying processing.

Results and Conclusions

The results showed that constructive and active annotations incurred different reading patterns, with the constructive annotations attracting more attention than the active annotations. The results implied that instructors could use seed annotations of a constructive level in reading assignments to facilitate reading comprehension.

注释质量如何影响学术阅读:一项眼动追踪研究
协作阅读有助于学生理解复杂的学习材料。同伴学习者提供的高质量注释对于成功的协作阅读至关重要。然而,注释质量对阅读理解的影响尚不清楚。目的构建模拟协同阅读环境,进行互动式标注和点评。该环境用于进行实验室实验,并检查阅读他人注释的好处。方法选取47名大学生,随机分为两组。建设性注释组提供的注释包含与认知加工的建设性层面相关的信息,而主动注释组提供的注释包含与认知加工的主动层面相关的信息。使用前后测试来衡量学习收益。分析了系统日志文件和眼动追踪数据,以比较和对比底层处理的差异。结果与结论结果表明,建设性注释和主动注释的阅读模式不同,且建设性注释比主动注释更受关注。结果表明,教师可以在阅读作业中使用建设性水平的种子注释来促进阅读理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
6.00%
发文量
116
期刊介绍: The Journal of Computer Assisted Learning is an international peer-reviewed journal which covers the whole range of uses of information and communication technology to support learning and knowledge exchange. It aims to provide a medium for communication among researchers as well as a channel linking researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. JCAL is also a rich source of material for master and PhD students in areas such as educational psychology, the learning sciences, instructional technology, instructional design, collaborative learning, intelligent learning systems, learning analytics, open, distance and networked learning, and educational evaluation and assessment. This is the case for formal (e.g., schools), non-formal (e.g., workplace learning) and informal learning (e.g., museums and libraries) situations and environments. Volumes often include one Special Issue which these provides readers with a broad and in-depth perspective on a specific topic. First published in 1985, JCAL continues to have the aim of making the outcomes of contemporary research and experience accessible. During this period there have been major technological advances offering new opportunities and approaches in the use of a wide range of technologies to support learning and knowledge transfer more generally. There is currently much emphasis on the use of network functionality and the challenges its appropriate uses pose to teachers/tutors working with students locally and at a distance. JCAL welcomes: -Empirical reports, single studies or programmatic series of studies on the use of computers and information technologies in learning and assessment -Critical and original meta-reviews of literature on the use of computers for learning -Empirical studies on the design and development of innovative technology-based systems for learning -Conceptual articles on issues relating to the Aims and Scope
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信