Design Can Enhance eLearning Comprehension

Does reading comprehension suffer when learners switch frompaper to screens? This question has been studied from multiple angles, withvaried findings. There’s no definitive answer, but for eLearning professionals,a better question might be: How can eLearning design maximize learningpotential and mitigate potential barriers to comprehension?

Anyone considering implementing eLearning—or convertingexisting training to eLearning—should consider the differences in how learnerstake in and process information when using digital means (like desktop ortablet computers) versus reading printed material, and design accordingly!

Learners perform better on paper

So, what are those differences? A 2013 study compared participants’reading comprehension when reading on paper versus on computer screens. Itfound that people performed better on reading comprehension tests when theyread from paper. The researchers offered several possible explanations for whythis is the case.

• Scrolling: The researchers cite several studiesthat support the contention that scrolling interferes with readingcomprehension because it affects the readers’ mental representation of thetext. In simple English, that means that people often recall text by picturingwhere on the page they saw it. When learners scroll through multiple screens oftext, the text is not fixed in a location, and the learners cannot form a mentalpicture of where a specific passage is located, as they can when reading onpaper.
• Partial or entire text: When holding booksor printed documents, learners can leaf through and skip from page to page—theentire text is available to them at once. When reading on digital screens,learners can only see one screen of text at a time. They lack the physicalityof a book or printed document, which also gives them a tangible way to tell howfar they have progressed and how much they have left to read.
• Myth of multitasking: When answeringreading comprehension questions about a digital text, learners have to switchback and forth on the screen between the text and the question. This type ofmultitasking places additional demands on the learners, possibly interferingwith comprehension of the text. Considerable research has shown that, whenpeople think they are multitasking, they are actually switching between tasks,and they lose efficiency with each switch. But when reading a paper text,whether answering questions on a digital screen or on an additional piece ofpaper, learners can have both the text and the questions in front of them atthe same time, so multitasking is not required.
• Bias: The researchers cite a commonperception that digital media are more useful for short messages, while seriousstudy “should” be done using paper media. Learners holding this bias are less likelyto focus deeply on the material they are reading on-screen. However, thiscondition is difficult to study objectively or measure.
• Visual fatigue: People who spend a longtime reading a tablet or computer screen often report visual fatigue orheadaches, which can interfere with reading comprehension and recall, or may simplycause learners to prefer paper. Electronic readers (eReaders), such as Kindles,that use electronic ink and reflect light, rather than emitting light, causeless visual fatigue. Since most available research groups computers, tablets,and electronic readers into a single category, additional research that looksat eReaders and paper might provide useful insight.

The good news: eLearning designers can help

The good news for designers is that they can mitigate someof these factors by using sound, thoughtful design.

Take the issue of visual fatigue, for example. The qualityof screens is improving constantly. Much of the research was conductedseveral—even 10—years ago, and improvements in screen quality have addressedsome of the issues that cause visual fatigue. More importantly, the amount ofcustomization available to learners has also increased. Well-designed eLearningallows learners to manipulate the look of a screen: Learners can often increasefont size, adjust the contrast, and change colors. This is an area where instructionaldesigners can contribute by selecting clear, easy-to-read fonts and compatiblecolor combinations that offer sufficient contrast, making it easier for mostlearners to read the text, and by including options that give learners controlover the appearance of text.

Instructional designers can mitigate the effects ofscrolling and other navigation issues as well. Providing ample navigationalcues and chunking information into logical, screen-sized segments can aid learners’comprehension and reduce their need to scroll. Creating section and subsectiontitles in text, and including a navigation menu that lists and links to the sections,can make it easier for learners to both find the information they need whenthey need it and consume it in a logical way that aids in comprehension.

Designers can also address the question of multitasking.Many learners work on two or more screens, so allowing learners to keepmultiple windows open can eliminate the need to switch back and forth. Inaddition, placing interactivity, such as quiz questions or check-your-knowledgeexercises, close to the text they reference can aid in learner comprehensionand recall by reducing the amount of switching and backtracking required.Offering exercises at multiple points in the eLearning can reinforce learningby asking learners to recall and apply information more than once.

People prefer paper

Learner preference—bias—is an important consideration. Swedishresearchers Caroline Myrberg and Ninna Wiberg posit that problems with screenreading are more psychological than technological—a bias or preference forpaper, rather than technical barriers to learning (see References). Evenyounger learners, who are regarded as digital natives, show a strong preferencefor reading on paper over digital screens. However, younger learners usedigital media more often and for more purposes than do older learners, andeducation—from elementary grades through higher education—is increasingly replacingpaper with digital media. Several researchers suggest that that the bias towardpaper will disappear as younger generations use digital and paper mediainterchangeably or primarily use digital media in school.

Studies of university students bear this out: Students whoare exposed to and use well-designed eLearning materials show a less-pronouncedpreference for paper textbooks than students who do not regularly useelectronic texts.

Instructional design is a significant factor in learnerpreference. Myrberg and Wiberg point out that much of the text learners areasked to read on digital screens has simply been transferred from paper todigital—without using design characteristics that take advantage of the inherentfeatures of digital media that make them valuable. Once again, designers cantackle the problem:

• Incorporating quiz questions, matching games,and other forms of interactivity with the text, rather than presenting pageafter page of text, then a stand-alone test, can improve comprehension andengagement.
• Hyperlinking can enhance or detract fromcomprehension. Hyperlinks that take learners away from the text they arereading can interfere with comprehension, as the learners are constantly interruptedduring their reading. However, linked lists of resources that are presented atthe end of a related text can offer additional help and information that aidscomprehension.
• Younger learners expect digital experiences tobe fully digital experiences—not simply digital copies of a paper page,according to Myrberg and Wiberg. This means short texts that are integratedwith video, sound, quizzes, games, and other interactivity. They also wantintegration with social media. Research data show that learners are not simplyexpressing a preference for paper; they prefer paper to poorly designed digitaltextbooks that try to mimic paper!
• A final issue that Myrberg and Wiberg discuss isaccess to digital materials. Digital rights-management systems, or DRM, canmake it difficult for learners to use digital media efficiently. Sharing isdifficult. Sometimes, a learner’s digital rights to a text expire, and even ifshe can renew access, her notes and highlighting will have disappeared.Learners using paper media can highlight, write notes in the margins, dog-earpages, insert bookmarks, and do many other things that customize the paper copyto aid their learning and retention of the material. They can share textbooks,copy articles, and look at a page together. Where highlighting and bookmarking featuresexist in digital media, they are often hard to use or learners do not even knowthey exist. As research on other digital features (such as captioning of videos) shows, learners who know that these features exist often usethem and benefit from them. This is true even for features that were added tobenefit learners with disabilities; many or even most of the learners who usethem and benefit from them do not have disabilities.

The question of whether digital is “better” or “worse” thanpaper is too simplistic. Well-designed eLearning can overcome learnerpreference for paper and mitigate most perceived drawbacks of a digitalenvironment.

References

Jabr, Ferris. “The Reading Brain in the Digital Age: The Science of Paper versus Screens.” ScientificAmerican. 11 April 2013.

Hogle, Pamela. “Improve Engagement, Focus, and Comprehension with Closed Captions for eLearning Videos.”Learning Solutions Magazine. 5January 2017.

Mangen, Anne, Bente R. Walgermo, and Kolbjorn Bronnick. “Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension.”International Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 58. January 2013.

Myrberg, Caroline, and Ninna Wiberg. “Screen vs. paper: what is the difference for reading and learning?” Insights, Vol. 28, No. 2. July 2015.