, Volume 58, Issue 5, pp 70–79 | Cite as

Designing customizable reading modules for a high school literature classroom

  • L. Roxanne Russell
  • Joshua Cuevas


This design case follows an ongoing collaboration between an instructional technologist and a high school literature teacher promoting reading comprehension through modules that provide visually interesting display of text on a computer screen along with cognitive tools. The modules were found to boost comprehension of specific content in even one use, and over time, overall reading skills were improved. Specific examples from the design and development process of this collaboration are shared here to illustrate decisions made in the face of common constraints—limited time, funding, and technical know-how—that emerged from theory and pilot studies. Teacher educators and their instructional-technology collaborators can use the information from this design and research process to harness the potential of ubiquitous software in affordable, replicable, and pedagogically sound ways.


K-12 reading classroom technology integration design-based research PowerPoint animated text kinetic typography 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alfassi, M. (2004). Reading to learn: Effects of combined strategy instruction on high school students. Journal of Educational Research, 97(4), 171-184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Back, M., Cohen, J., Gold, R., Harrison, S., & Minneman, S. (2001) Speeder reader: An experiment in the future of reading. Paper, education track, and demo, Emerging Technologies. SIGGRAPH 2001, ACM Press.Google Scholar
  3. Brownie, B. (2007) The potential for application of gestalt principles in sreen-based, kinetic and fluid typographic artefacts. Retrieved December 8, 2008 from University of Hertfordshire, Faculty for the Creative and Cultural Industries:
  4. Burke, J. (2000). Reading reminders. Portsmouth, NH: Boyton/CookGoogle Scholar
  5. Chun, M. M. & Potter, M.C. (1995). A two-stage model for multiple target detection in rapid serial visual presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology 21(1), pp. 109-27.Google Scholar
  6. Collins, T. (2006). Culturally responsive literacy instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(2), 62-65.Google Scholar
  7. Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R. (2007). Testing and refining the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 311-325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cuevas, J. A., L.R. Russell & M. Irving (2012). An examination of the effect of customized reading modules on diverse secondary students’ reading comprehension and motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development. 60(3), 445-467. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 33(6), 934-945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dake, D. (2005). Aesthetics Theory. In K. Smith, S. Moriarty, G. Barbatsis & K. Kenney (Eds.) Handbook of visual communication: Theory, methods and media. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  11. de Jong, M.T., & Bus, A.G. (2002) Quality of book-reading matters for emergent leaders: An experiment with the same book in a regular or electronic format. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 145-155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dewitz, P., & Dewitz, P. K. (2003). They can read the words, but they can’t understand: Refining comprehension assessment. Reading Teacher, 56(5), 422.Google Scholar
  13. Engel, B., Ditterline, P., & Yeung, Brian (2000) The effects of kinetic typography on readability. Retrieved November 24, 2009 from Carnegie Mellon University:
  14. Doty, D., Popplewell, S., & Byers, G. (2001). Interactive CD-ROM storybooks and young readers’ reading comprehension. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 374-84.Google Scholar
  15. Ford, S., Forlizzi, J. & Ishizaki, S. Kinetic typography: Issues in time-based presentation of text, CHI ‘97 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems: looking to the future, March 22-27, 1997, Atlanta, Georgia.Google Scholar
  16. Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  17. Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Metsala, J. L., & Cox, K. E. (1999). Motivational and cognitive predictors of text comprehension and reading amount. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(3), 231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hasselbring, T. S., & Goin, L. I. (2004). Literacy instruction for older struggling readers: what is the role of technology? Reading & Writing Quarterly, 20(2), 123-144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hemphill, L. (2007). Poetry in motion. Presented at the 5th International Conference on New Directions in the Humanities, Paris, 17-20 July 2007. Working paper for presentation retrieved November 24, 2009 from:
  20. Hock, M., & Mellard, D. (2005). Reading comprehension strategies for adult literacy outcomes. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49(3ov), 192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kang, T. & Muter, P. (1989) Reading dynamically displayed text. Behaviour and Information Technology 8(1), pp. 33-42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kelley, M., & Clausen-Grace, N. (2006). R5: The sustained silent reading makeover that transformed readers. Reading Teacher, 60(2), 148-156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lea, R. B., Mulligan, E. J., & Walton, J. L. (2005). Accessing distant premise information: How memory feeds reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(3), 387-395.Google Scholar
  24. Leone, P. E., Krezmien, M., Mason, L., & Meisel, S. M. (2005). Organizing and delivering empirically based literacy instruction to incarcerated youth. Exceptionality, 13(2), 89-102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Matthew, K. (1997). A comparison of the influence of interactive CD-ROM storybooks and traditional print storybooks on reading comprehension. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 29(3), 263-275.Google Scholar
  26. Mills, C. & Weldon, L. (1987). Reading text from computer screens. ACM Computing Surveys, 19(4), 329-58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moss, B. (2005). Making a case and a place for effective content area literacy instruction in the elementary grades. Reading Teacher, 59(1), 46-55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. National Endowment for the Arts. (2007). To read or not to read: A question of national consequence (Research Report No. 47). Retrieved November 19, 2007 from NEA Web site:
  29. Nishimura, Y. & Sato, K. (1985). Dynamic information display. Visible Language, 19(2), 251-271.Google Scholar
  30. Pearson, P.D., Ferdig, R.E., Blomeyer, R.L., & Moran, J. U.S. Department of Education, North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. (2005). The effects of technology on reading performance in the middle-school grades: a meta-analysis with recommendations for policy (ED-01-CO-0011). Illinois: Retrieved from
  31. Reeves, T.C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2005). Design research: A socially responsible approach to instructional technology research in higher education. Journal of Computing and Higher Education, 16(2), 97-116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Slavin, R.E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective reading programs for middle and high schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(3), 290-322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Snapp, J. C., & Glover, J. A. (1990). Advance organizers and study questions. Journal of Educational Research, 83(5), 266-271.Google Scholar
  34. Thompson, D. N. (1997). Practice effects of advance organization with older adult subjects. Educational Gerontology, 23(3), 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Thompson, D. N. (1998). Using advance organizers to facilitate reading comprehension among older adults. Educational Gerontology, 24(7), 625-638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tracey, D., Morrow, L.M. (2006). Lenses on reading. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  37. Tyler, S. W., Delaney, H., & Kinnucan, M. (1983). Specifying the nature of reading ability differences and advance organizer effects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(3), 359-373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. Williams, B.O. & Stimatz, L. R. (2005). The origins of graphic screen design principles: theory or rhetoric? International Journal of Instructional Media 32(2), 181-194.Google Scholar
  40. Wong, Y. (1996). Temporal typography: Video. Proceedings of the 1996 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver , 13-18 April 1996. Retrieved December 1, 2007 from CHI 96 Website:

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Phoenix OnlineNorcrossUSA
  2. 2.University of North GeorgiaDahlonegaUSA

Personalised recommendations