students learn far more effectively from print textbooks than screens

[JakeStarkey]

A new study shows that students learn way more effectively from print textbooks than screens

A new study shows that students learn far more effectively from print textbooks than screens

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I found this be true when I taught grad school. My kids, nieces, and nephews all said 'screens are for down and dirty' and print books and articles are for in-depth learning.

The mixed-lecture mode far surpasses k-12us learning models, imo.

 

[Auld Phart]

A new study shows that students learn way more effectively from print textbooks than screens

A new study shows that students learn far more effectively from print textbooks than screens

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I found this be true when I taught grad school. My kids, nieces, and nephews all said 'screens are for down and dirty' and print books and articles are for in-depth learning.

The mixed-lecture mode far surpasses k-12us learning models, imo.

Guess my grandsons are the exception to the rule

 

[OldLady]

It took me years to adjust to reading material from a screen. I still like to curl up with a book; you can take notes in it, fold back the corner of the page to mark a good part, etc. I suppose there are equivalents for an online publication, but it won't ever be the same for me.
Good for the world tree population, though, I guess.

 

[usmbguest5318]

It took me years to adjust to reading material from a screen. I still like to curl up with a book; you can take notes in it, fold back the corner of the page to mark a good part, etc. I suppose there are equivalents for an online publication, but it won't ever be the same for me.
Good for the world tree population, though, I guess.

I suppose there are equivalents for an online publication

It is, of course, possible for online publications to provide that functionality. I have seen annotated online content, but I don't know what privileges are granted to readers of online content that's published/distributed as a "shared" document. One's own digital content can without question be annotated, at least content in PDF form and in MS Word form can be; I've annotated plenty of such documents.

While I don't outright object to digital texts and other instructional material, I am of the mind that hard-copy content is overall the better mode. I especially do not like that digital materials require students to have access to resources -- electricity, digital devices (pc, phone/phablet), high speed Internet access, etc. -- that some may not 24/7 have and that, frankly, cost more to have than do a pencil or pen. The other thing I don't like about digital content is that, unlike hard-copy content, is that it requires electricity. If, for example a storm knocks out one's power, one may not be able to study content that is available only digitally. Being in such a position is essentially that of losing an opportunity to catch-up or get ahead because when such events happen, the school/teacher may well delay the progression of the curriculum. [1] [2] [3]


Notes:

1. Mind you, I don't think anyone offers digital educational materials explicitly and in any way to confound poor students' ability to learn and access to education, but it's not lost on me that for the poorest kids/families, doing so has that effect. I don't know how public K-12 school systems mitigate that effect. Do they even do so or attempt to do so? I know only that for my kids, such content and access to it were among the many things for which I had to pay.
2. I took your "curl up with a book" phrase as an allusion to those two notions, but perhaps neither is what you had in mind...
   
3. I didn't really have "snow days" when I was in school because the teachers lived on campus with the students. Everyone just had to trudge their way from the dorm to the classrooms. In one instance where the power went out in a classroom building, we those classes were moved to the common rooms of the dorms and dining halls.
   
   My kids' middle school had the policy that if weather caused the school to close on the day of an exam, the exam would happen on the first day that classes resumed. I asked one of the teachers about that, and he stated that the median and average grades on such tests were unsurprisingly yet markedly higher than those for other tests, moving up from a middle B to low A. It was pretty clear that lower performing kids used the "snow day" to do more studying than they normally did for a test...thus my remark about opportunity lost....

 

[usmbguest5318]

A new study shows that students learn way more effectively from print textbooks than screens

A new study shows that students learn far more effectively from print textbooks than screens

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I found this be true when I taught grad school. My kids, nieces, and nephews all said 'screens are for down and dirty' and print books and articles are for in-depth learning.

The mixed-lecture mode far surpasses k-12us learning models, imo.

Guess my grandsons are the exception to the rule

He may very well be, and that's a great thing -- some might call it a distinctive advantage/competency -- that bodes well for his future....There are exceptions to every rule/observation. That there are, however, doesn't obviate the merit and/or implications of the rule/observation.

The article addresses that some individuals do indeed more aptly comprehend digital content than they do hard-copy content.

[W]e found a select group of undergraduates who actually comprehended better when they moved from print to digital. What distinguished this atypical group was that they actually read slower when the text was on the computer than when it was in a book.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A family member who teaches SpEd informed that such students seem to visually learn by sight association far better than print association.

That makes sense, at least to me.

 

[usmbguest5318]

From the article:

In 2009, California passed a law requiring that all college textbooks be available in electronic form by 2020; in 2011, Florida lawmakers passed legislation requiring public schools to convert their textbooks to digital versions.

I don't take exception with CA's legislation (though I don't know why a law needed to be passed for it); however, were I a FL resident with kids in school there, I'd object to it's law. I explained the reasons why in post 4, but the article identifies yet another excellent reason why:

[T]here's no "one medium fits all" approach.

Students said they preferred and performed better when reading on screens. But their actual performance tended to suffer...when it came to specific questions, comprehension was significantly better when participants read printed texts.

And therein is found yet another illustration of the dichotomy between perception and reality. One can only hope that the researchers and/or teachers disabused the students of their misconceptions about themselves and their performance by sharing with them the results of the study. Doing so would be among the most palpable ways to teach kids about the value of the saying "trust, but verify," not only when it comes to other people's assertions and beliefs, but also and most importantly, with regard to one's own. After all, "trust, but verify" is at the very heart of every discipline taught in school.
​

Thinking about the matter as an adult who reads a lot and, these days, must thus read a lot of digital content, I can say I strongly prefer digital content; however, that preference derives from the conveniences pertaining to finding linkages and specific passages in the text. There is no Ctrl-F feature for hard-copy materials.

To be sure, however, when it comes to reading content that has footnotes and endnotes (most of what I read does), I prefer a hard-copy to a digital copy because scrolling to the note causes a larger mental loss of place, as it were, than does glancing to the bottom of the page or dog-earing a page and flipping to the end. For documents that are particularly important for me to read quickly and completely, however, I deal with that by printing the document for the first read of it.

But I'm an adult. I'll figure out ways to overcome the comprehension and convenience challenges digital content presents. I will because I have to; it's part of the burden of responsibility one faces as an adult. In contrast, kids, I think, are less innovative, motivated, committed, intrepid...something....Most of them are quite content to encounter an obstacle or inconvenience and simply decide and decide to have "Sam Nunberg" moment. That is to say, they'll decide something akin to "geez, this takes too much time and effort, and I don't wanna do it; so I'm not going to."

Insofar as kids are generally predisposed to varying manifestations of apathy, whatever educators can do that dissuades from doing so is good thing. If that means making sure that texts are available in hard-copy, well, then that's one of the things educators (school systems) must do. After all, a key goal of the educational process is to disabuse kids of their will to be apathetic about anything whereof their langor may contribute detrimentally to their unsuccessfulness as adults.

 

[psikeyhackr]

But what does it say about the subjects and how interested the students are in the subjects?

If I want to know math and don't give a damn about history then how does that affect the results?

 

[Norman]

And the best outcome is reached if public school is avoided.

 

[IsaacNewton]

I would think that just the fact kids associate screens with television, movies, and games, and usually when you are looking at a computer screen it is almost always a very fleeting moment as you can easily click on to something else, like on Youtube. Printed books are permanent, there isn't anything else to go to or any expectation of going to something else. Except perhaps to a screen for more view, click, scroll, click, view after you are done reading.

 

[BULLDOG]

And the best outcome is reached if public school is avoided.

We don't need no education.

 

[Norman]

And the best outcome is reached if public school is avoided.

We don't need no education.

No we do need an education, that's precisely why I gave the holy grail advice of education. What are the kids learning at school? That the US constitution is bad (even though as public workers they should teach the exact opposite).

No wonder no one learns a shit in public school, complete waste of time and money. They need unions, government force and all the other bad stuff, because they have no product. They are shit.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Well, Norman, I hear your frustration. As long as parents generally will not be involved with their children's schools and school work, then the product will be degraded, yes.