Master's Dissertation First Full Draft

6.6. General discussion

The experimental data obtained is imperfect, but is strong enough to analyse and draw tentative conclusions from. The experimental results obtained are largely consistent with the theoretical framework constructed and the existing empirical evidence discussed in Chapters 3 and 2 respectively. It is clear from these results and their indication of clear performance differences performing similar tasks by participants with a significant amount of experience using these devices (in addition to existing empirical evidence and a range of theoretical contributions) that the digital word is not equivalent to the analogue word. Furthermore, these results reiterate that reading is a complex, multi-faceted construct and that its theorised strong visuospatial and other grounded aspects are only part of the remarkably complex activity that is literacy.

The theoretical framework constructed in Chapter 3 effectively predicts not only meaningful differences between the analogue and digital word, but that a substantial degree of similarity between the two can be obtained by more effectively managing the mediation process enforced by devices such as laptop and tablet PCs. However, as suggested by the theoretical considerations discussed and as implied by results obtained and their analysis, a deeper and more detailed understanding of these mechanisms is required in order to better manage and more optimally utilise our interactions with and effective use of these digital devices.

A conclusion which can be drawn from all of this is that the introduction of these new digital technologies, rather than replacing paper, instead allows us to expand the usefulness of the written word, enabling new ways of using and interacting with the written word. It is in this that the strength of the digital word lies – in its ability to expand and complement, not replace print text or the analogue word.

6.7. Strengths of this study

This study has both theoretical and empirical value, with a number of relevant implications. Many existing studies in this field (e.g. Mangen et al., 2013; Wells, 2012, etc.) focus on testing comprehension (i.e. testing participants very soon after completing their reading task). While this is easier logistically to manage for researchers, it does not provide a very accurate or ecologically valid picture of real learning – very few studies have focused on this, with Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) being one of very few examples. This study also examined both note-taking and reading-only from the perspective of learning, further strengthening its contribution. It also departs from Mueller and Oppenheimer’s (2014) method, which involved learners watch recorded video lectures of the text passages being read to them, instead focusing purely on interaction with the written word.

A theoretical contribution made by this study centres on the synthesis and integration of are several key (existing) ideas which have served as the basis for advancing our understanding of educational technology, in particular modern mobile personal computing devices such as tablets for the purpose of improving our interactions with and relationship with the digital word: (1) recognising that the written word is not only a technology (or symbolic technology) in and of itself, but also one of the earliest forms of educational technology and responsible for fundamental changes to the human mind and human thought, enabling a vast array of things which were previously simply not possible; (2) recognising that human cognition is not abstract, but is instead embodied or grounded in perception, proprioception, bodily states, and simulations and the implications thereof for our interaction with technologies like the written word; and (3) recognising that digital text is fundamentally different from its predecessors because of its lack of fixity and ontological disconnectedness from the substrate supporting it (as well as its ability to create the illusion of a virtual substrate).

Theorists such as Ong (1982) and Donald (2001) have highlighted the written word’s seminal role as a technology or symbolic technology which has fundamentally transformed human thought and which has played a key role in the development of human civilisation and Donald (2001) does briefly visit the notion that human cognition is embodied. Currently active researchers in this field such as Anne Mangen (2008, 2013a, 2013b, 2016, among others) have highlighted the role of grounded cognition and Mangen in particular (2013a) has highlighted the digital word’s lack of fixity and ontological disconnectedness from the substrate supporting it and has pondered the implications of this. Although these theoretical assertions are not new, this particular group of assertions are not commonly integrated and synthesised with one another. A strength of this study is that it simultaneously highlights these critical (existing) insights, discusses them in some detail and then integrates and synthesises them to strengthen the existing theoretical framework.

6.8. Limitations and future research

As mentioned several times during this chapter, the acts of reading and writing are extraordinarily complex. While the experiments conducted as part of this study provided useful insights, they also encountered a range of potential confounding variables. In addition to future research which builds on this theoretical and empirical work, future research will need to examine these various aspects again in a finer-grained manner, with more tightly-controlled research studies designed to test only one or so variables at a time, enabling for tighter control of potential confounding variables.

This research, in particular its experiments, were limited by the several factors. Firstly, the small and unbalanced samples in this study suggest future research needs to more carefully control for this by simplifying each experimental setup and testing for fewer things at a time with greater numbers of participants. Secondly, lack of standardisation across participant devices suggests that future research will need to better determine whether allowing participants to use their own devices adds sufficient ecological validity so as to warrant dealing with the other potential issues which it invites with it. Thirdly, no testing was done to determine participant proficiency at taking notes and whether this was in fact their preferred study strategy – future research needs to address this aspect more carefully. Given that multilingual populations are common in South Africa and many other countries, future research needs to more robustly measure English language proficiency to more effectively control for its impact, or else consider running these kinds of experiments in other languages.

Future research could also examine the impact of and effectiveness of other modern mobile PC device related functionalities and media such as the ability to record audio notes within parts of the text and how well this integrates with existing study methods. This would be particularly interesting to examine because it combines the written and spoken words in a way that traditional text-based study experiments simply does not.