The research-to-practice gap in teaching reading with digital texts: Results from a survey of US elementary teachers

IF 2 2区教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Journal of Research in Reading Pub Date : 2025-05-03 DOI:10.1111/1467-9817.70004

Laura S. Tortorelli, John Z. Strong

{"title":"The research-to-practice gap in teaching reading with digital texts: Results from a survey of US elementary teachers","authors":"Laura S. Tortorelli, John Z. Strong","doi":"10.1111/1467-9817.70004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of digital texts for reading instruction, and research identities both potential advantages and drawbacks for using digital texts for reading instruction.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This paper presents the results of a quantitative survey of a representative sample of US elementary-grade teachers (<i>n</i> = 468) describing how they used digital texts for reading instruction during the 2020–2021 school year. Survey development included a literature review, pilot testing (<i>n</i> = 38), cognitive interviews (<i>n</i> = 8) and expert review.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Results indicated that 99.6% of respondents used digital texts for reading instruction, most frequently levelled texts (90.9% using them at least once a week), decodable texts (85.2%), informational texts (84.7%) and passages for fluency practice (82.5%). Read-aloud mode was the most frequently used text feature regardless of the text type or literacy goals. Teachers used digital texts mainly as substitutes for print texts, and few received training (28.8%) or resources (17.1%) to support using digital texts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The findings indicate a misalignment between the research evidence on the affordances of digital texts for reading instruction and how these tools are used in classrooms. They highlight the need for future research and professional development to support teachers' Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) and classroom use of digital texts.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47611,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Reading","volume":"48 3","pages":"240-258"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-9817.70004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Reading","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-9817.70004","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of digital texts for reading instruction, and research identities both potential advantages and drawbacks for using digital texts for reading instruction.

Methods

This paper presents the results of a quantitative survey of a representative sample of US elementary-grade teachers (n = 468) describing how they used digital texts for reading instruction during the 2020–2021 school year. Survey development included a literature review, pilot testing (n = 38), cognitive interviews (n = 8) and expert review.

Results

Results indicated that 99.6% of respondents used digital texts for reading instruction, most frequently levelled texts (90.9% using them at least once a week), decodable texts (85.2%), informational texts (84.7%) and passages for fluency practice (82.5%). Read-aloud mode was the most frequently used text feature regardless of the text type or literacy goals. Teachers used digital texts mainly as substitutes for print texts, and few received training (28.8%) or resources (17.1%) to support using digital texts.

Conclusions

The findings indicate a misalignment between the research evidence on the affordances of digital texts for reading instruction and how these tools are used in classrooms. They highlight the need for future research and professional development to support teachers' Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) and classroom use of digital texts.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

数字文本阅读教学的研究与实践差距：对美国小学教师的调查结果

2019冠状病毒病大流行加速了数字文本在阅读教学中的应用，研究发现了使用数字文本进行阅读教学的潜在优势和缺点。本文介绍了对美国小学教师代表性样本（n = 468）的定量调查结果，该调查描述了他们在2020-2021学年如何使用数字文本进行阅读教学。调查开发包括文献综述、试点测试（n = 38）、认知访谈（n = 8）和专家评审。结果99.6%的受访者使用数字文本进行阅读指导，最常见的文本是水平文本（90.9%每周至少使用一次），可解码文本（85.2%），信息文本（84.7%）和流利练习段落（82.5%）。无论文本类型或读写目标如何，朗读模式都是最常用的文本功能。教师使用数字文本主要是作为印刷文本的替代品，很少有人接受过培训（28.8%）或资源（17.1%）来支持使用数字文本。研究结果表明，关于数字文本对阅读教学的辅助作用的研究证据与这些工具如何在课堂上使用之间存在不一致。他们强调了未来研究和专业发展的必要性，以支持教师的技术教学和内容知识（TPACK）和课堂上使用数字文本。

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 Research in Reading Multiple-

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Journal of Research in Reading provides an international forum for researchers into literacy. It is a refereed journal, principally devoted to reports of empirical studies in reading and related fields, and to informed reviews of relevant literature. The journal welcomes papers researching issues related to the learning, teaching and use of literacy in a variety of contexts; papers on the history and development of literacy; papers about policy and strategy for literacy as related to children and adults. Journal of Research in Reading encourages papers within any research paradigm and from researchers in any relevant field such as anthropology, cultural studies, education, history of education, language and linguistics, philosophy, psychology and sociology.