As items are evaluated in the NCSeT Research Literature Database Interpretive Annotations are written to explain how an article or book or research study relates the NCSeT research program.
As items are evaluated in the NCSeT Research Literature Database Interpretive Annotations are written to explain how an article or book or research study relates the NCSeT research program. Examples of these annotations are shown below:
Boyle, E.A., Rosenberg, M. S., Connelly, V. J., Washburn, S. G., Brinckerhoff, L. C., & Banerjee, M. (2003). Effects of audio texts on the acquisition of secondary-level content by students with mild disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 26, 203–214.
Tags:
Social Studies: High School; Learning Disabilities; Translational; Instructional; NotationalInterpretive Annotation:
This paper reports on a study of translational and instructional resources. The translational resource is a full audio translation of a textbook on government. The instructional resource, SLiCK, is a study strategy prompting students to “… use the text and recording materials to attend to and take notes about on the readings…” This strategy was not implemented well, the students receiving no training in notetaking or extra time to complete this additional task. While this aspect was not studied, the audio recording was specially “tabbed” to provide random access to pages, chapters sections and subsections. The effectiveness of the audio resource alone was considered surprising “…as this has not been a common finding in previous research.” Torgesen et al, 1987 and Schumaker et al, 1984 are cited as ßcounter examples. No discussion is provided on the mechanisms by which the audio translation assist students or improve comprehension.——–
Saye, J., & Brush, T. (2001). The use of embedded scaffolds with hypermedia-supported student-centered learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(4), 333–356.
Tags:
Research; Quasi-Experimental; Social Studies; High School; General Education; Navigational; Summarizing; Instructional; NotationalInterpretive Annotation:
This paper reports on the use of "scaffolds" in database of documents related to the civil rights movement. Several different types of scaffolds were used, but those studied were different summarizing and navigational resources assisting students to find relevant information, and instructional resources guiding students in reflecting on their use of the database.A weak research design relied on log files tracking student navigation, student notebooks, and post-activity interviews. Results from two classrooms showed shallow use of the database and of the guides. There was no pre-assessment of students' computer skills, hypertext literacy, knowledge of the content, group process skills, or any direct instruction provided. Results may be a result of inadequate time for the given task.
A terminology issue arises for NCSeT as to whether it should adapt the term "scaffolds" rather than "resources" with scaffolds being more general in the literature.
——–
Horton, S.V., Lovitt, T. C., Givens, A., & Nelson, R. (1989). Teaching social studies to high school students with academic handicaps in a mainstreamed setting: Effects of a computerized study guide. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(2), 102–107.
Tags:
Research; Experimental Sciences; High School; Learning Disabilities; SummarizingInterpretive Annotation:
This early study of computer-based study guides used with students with learning disabilities is well structured and tightly written. The guides were a form of summarizing resource based on the main ideas of of passages from two history textbooks. Statistically significant results were found in comparisons with control groups just reading the passages, or groups told to take notes. The study guides consisted of a questions reflecting main ideas from the passages, and the answer to those questions. The comprehension test questions derived closely from the study guide questions. This opens the question of how students might have performed by reviewing the study guides alone and not bothering to read the passages at all. Interestingly, the discussion focused largely on issues of adequate access to technology.——–
Higgins, K., Boone, R., & Lovitt, T. (1996). Hypertext support for remedial students and students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(4), 402–412.
Tags:
Research; Experimental; Social Studies; High School; General Education; Learning Disabilities; Translational; Instructional; EvaluativeInterpretive Annotation:
This early study used a strong experimental design to examine the uses of study guides with students with learning disabilities. It is somewhat similar to Horton et al., 1989. The small sample size limited statistical significants of the results, but which do suggest the utility of study guides. However, no information is presented on how students actually interacted with the guides. Such data might explain outcomes where teacher lecture + study guide produced better results than the study guide alone; perhaps it was having two passes at the information, in two different formats that was critical. There is the suggestion that information appearing in pop-up notes was better retained that information in the body of the text. Is this because students are drawn to this hypermedia resource and so attend to it more than the text? It was unclear exactly what semantic roll the various resources played; several different resource types are indicated: translational, illustrative, evaluative are suggested but not clearly identified.