Development and Explanation of a Framework for Social Reading: Social Reading Based on Shared Regulation (SRBSR)
Journal: Journal of Higher Education Research DOI: 10.32629/jher.v2i3.341
Abstract
With the development of technologies for reading and the rise of social reading which considers readers the core in learning and emphasizes sharing and interaction, traditional theoretical reading models are facing challenges. Social reading is a type of interactive reading activity that can activate readers’ reading and discussions, promote expressions of multiple ideas, and facilitate collaborative inquiry and knowledge building. While previous researchers proposed theories or frameworks in reading or literacy research, no specific model has been developed especially for social reading and socially shared regulation. Integrating the socially shared regulation theory into social reading and expanding the theoretical perspective of problem-solving on reading can be beneficial for constructing a new social reading model. In this study, we propose a theoretical framework, Social Reading Based on Shared Regulation (SRBSR), which can account for the details and procedures of readers’ collaborative learning and shared regulatory behaviors during social reading activities. This framework can help improve the theory of purposeful reading in the new media environment and provide future instructors and researchers an operable model for designing and developing social reading courses.
Keywords
social reading, shared regulation, knowledge building, activity theory
Full Text
PDF - Viewed/Downloaded: 20 TimesIndexation
Download Index RecordReferences
[1] Arnseth, H. C. Activity theory and situated learning theory: contrasting views of educational practice. Pedagogy, Culture & Society. 2008; 16(3): 289-302.
[2] Barrett-Tatum, J. Examining English language arts common core state standards instruction through cultural historical activity theory. Education Policy Analysis Archives. 2015; 23(63): 1-33.
[3] Bereiter, C., Scardamalia, M. The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1987.
[4] Britt, M. A., Rouet, J.-F., Durik, A. M. Literacy beyond text comprehension: A theory of purposeful reading. New York, NY: Routledge; 2017.
[5] Cerdan, R., Gilabert, R., Vidal-Abarca, E. Selecting information to answer questions: Strategic individual differences when searching texts. Learning and Individual Differences. 2011; 21: 201–205.
[6] Chanlin, L. J. Reading strategy and the need of e-book features. The Electronic Library. 2013; 31(3): 329-344.
[7] Chen, X. Social reading in the new media environment. China Educational Technology. 2013; 6: 21-25.
[8] Chen, X. Du, J. The case study of social annotation teaching based on knowledge building. Modern Distance Education Research. 2017; 4: 78-87.
[9] Chen, X., Guo, C. (2019) The Development and Application of a Social Reading Platform and the Double-level Scaffolding. In: Lund, K., Niccolai, G. P., Lavoué, E., Hmelo-Silver, C., Gweon, G., Baker, M. (Eds.). A Wide Lens: Combining Embodied, Enactive, Extended, and Embedded Learning in Collaborative Settings. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Lyon, France: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
[10] Cordón-García, J. A., Alonso-Arévalo, J., Gómez-Díaz, R., Linder, D. Social reading: platforms, applications, clouds and tags. Oxford, England: Chandos; 2013.
[11] Dai, S. On the cultivation of new literacies in modern society. Technology Enhanced Foreign Language Education. 2015; 49(5): 645–653.
[12] Doto, J. Supporting Knowledge Building with Informational Texts During Elementary Reading Instruction: A Design based Study. New Brunswic: Rutgers University; 2015.
[13] Engeström, Y. From teams to knots: Activity-theoretical studies of collaboration and learning at work. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 2008.
[14] Flynn, L. L. Developing critical reading skills through cooperative problem solving. The Reading Teacher. 1989; 42(9): 664-668.
[15] Gough, P. B., Tunmer, W. E. Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial & Special Education. 1986; 7(1): 6-10.
[16] Hadwin, A. L., Järvelä, S., Miller, M. Self-regulated, co-regulated, and socially shared regulation of learning. In: B. J. Zimmerman, D. H. Schunk (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. New York, NY: Routledge; 2011.
[17] Hadwin, A. F., Oshige, M. Self-regulation, coregulation, and socially shared regulation: Exploring perspectives of social in self-regulated learning theory. Teachers College Record. 2011; 113: 240–264.
[18] Hoover, W. A., Gough, P. B. The simple view of reading. Reading & Writing. 1990; 2(2): 127-160.
[19] Hussein, A. S. Analysis of the real situation of teaching reading comprehension to first year students at the department of English language and literature at Al-Zaytoonah Private University of Jordan. Asian Social Science. 2012; 8(4): 237-251.
[20] Iiskala, T., Vauras, M., Lehtinen, E., Salonen, P. Socially shared metacognition of dyads of pupils in collaborative mathematical problem-solving processes. Learning and Instruction. 2011; 21(3): 379–393.
[21] Johnson, D. Activity theory, mediated action and literacy: Assessing how children make meaning in multiple modes. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 2003; 10(1): 103-129.
[22] Kelly, M., Brian, L., Gary, K., Eric, M. Use of a social annotation platform for pre-class reading assignments in a flipped introductory physics class. Frontiers in Education. 2018; 3(8): 1-12.
[23] Kim, Y., Ma, J. H. The role of purposeful reading in L2 Learners’ reading comprehension, task motivation, and perceived difficulty. Studies in English Education. 2016; 21(1): 73-95.
[24] Leont’ev, A. N. Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1978.
[25] Leu, D.J., Zawilinski, L., Castek, J., Banerjee, M., Housand, B., Liu, Y. What is new about the new literacies of online reading comprehension? In: L. Rush, J. Eakle, A. Berger (Eds.). Secondary school literacy: What research reveals for classroom practices. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English; 2007.
[26] Lupo, S.M., Berry, A., Thacker, E., Sawyer, A., Merritt, J. Rethinking text sets to support knowledge building and interdisciplinary learning. The Reading Teacher. 2019; 73(4): 513-524.
[27] Miller, M., Hadwin, A. Scripting and awareness tools for regulating collaborative learning: Changing the landscape of support in CSCL. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015; 52: 573-588.
[28] Paris, S. G., Hamilton, E. E. The Development of Children’s Reading Comprehension. In: Israel, S. Duffy, G. (Eds). Handbook of Research on Reading Comprehension. New York, NY: Routledge; 2009.
[29] Pourkalhor, O., Kohan, N. Teaching reading comprehension through short stories in advance classes. Asian Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities. 2013; 2(2): 52-60.
[30] Rosenblatt, L. M. The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press; 1978.
[31] Rouet, J. F., Britt, M. A. Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In: M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, G. Schraw (Eds.). Text relevance and learning from text. Greenwich, CT: Information Age; 2011.
[32] Rouet, J. F., Britt, M. A., Durik, A. M. RESOLV: Readers' representation of reading contexts and tasks. Educational Psychologist. 2017; 52(3): 200-215.
[33] Scardamalia M., Bereiter C. Computer support for knowledge-building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 1993; 3(3): 265-283.
[34] Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C. Knowledge Building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.). Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006.
[35] Snow, C. E., the RAND Reading Group. Reading for understanding. Toward a R&D program for reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND; 2002.
[36] Swann, J., Allington, D. Reading groups and the language of literary texts: a case study in social reading. Language & Literature. 2009; 18(3): 247-264.
[37] Tabak, I. Synergy: a complement to emerging patterns of distributed scaffolding. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2004; 13(3): 305-335.
[38] Trott, B., Naik, Y. Finding good reads on goodreads. Reference & User Services Quarterly. 2012; 51(4): 319-323.
[39] Vlieghe, J., Vandermeersche, G., Soetaert, R. Social media in literacy education: Exploring social reading with pre-service teachers. New Media & Society. 2016; 18(5): 800-816.
[40] Volet, S., Summers, M., Thurman, J. High-level co-regulation in collaborative learning: How does it emerge and how is it sustained? Learning and Instruction. 2009; 19(2): 128–143.
[41] Vygotsky, L. S. Thought and language. Cambridge. MA: The MIT Press; 1986.
[42] Winne, P. H., Hadwin, A. F. Studying as self-regulated engagement in learning. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, A. Graesser (Eds.). Metacognition in educational theory and practice. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1998.
[43] Wu, L., Wu, Y. Adolescents' social reading: motivation, behaviour, and their relationship. The Electronic Library. 2017; 35(2): 246-262.
[44] Yamazumi, K. Engaging Children in Reading Activity Through Collaboration in a Japanese Elementary School: An Activity-Theoretical Case Study. In: Ng, C., Bartlett, B. (eds). Improving Reading and Reading Engagement in the 21st Century. Singapore: Springer; 2017.
[45] Zhang, J., Sun, Y. Reading for idea advancement in a grade 4 knowledge building community. Instructional Science. 2011; 39(4): 429-452.
[46] Zheng, L., Li, X., Huang, R. The effect of socially shared regulation approach on learning performance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 2017; 20(4): 35-46.
[47] Zimmerman, B. J. Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In: M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, M. Zeidner (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 2000.
[2] Barrett-Tatum, J. Examining English language arts common core state standards instruction through cultural historical activity theory. Education Policy Analysis Archives. 2015; 23(63): 1-33.
[3] Bereiter, C., Scardamalia, M. The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1987.
[4] Britt, M. A., Rouet, J.-F., Durik, A. M. Literacy beyond text comprehension: A theory of purposeful reading. New York, NY: Routledge; 2017.
[5] Cerdan, R., Gilabert, R., Vidal-Abarca, E. Selecting information to answer questions: Strategic individual differences when searching texts. Learning and Individual Differences. 2011; 21: 201–205.
[6] Chanlin, L. J. Reading strategy and the need of e-book features. The Electronic Library. 2013; 31(3): 329-344.
[7] Chen, X. Social reading in the new media environment. China Educational Technology. 2013; 6: 21-25.
[8] Chen, X. Du, J. The case study of social annotation teaching based on knowledge building. Modern Distance Education Research. 2017; 4: 78-87.
[9] Chen, X., Guo, C. (2019) The Development and Application of a Social Reading Platform and the Double-level Scaffolding. In: Lund, K., Niccolai, G. P., Lavoué, E., Hmelo-Silver, C., Gweon, G., Baker, M. (Eds.). A Wide Lens: Combining Embodied, Enactive, Extended, and Embedded Learning in Collaborative Settings. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Lyon, France: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
[10] Cordón-García, J. A., Alonso-Arévalo, J., Gómez-Díaz, R., Linder, D. Social reading: platforms, applications, clouds and tags. Oxford, England: Chandos; 2013.
[11] Dai, S. On the cultivation of new literacies in modern society. Technology Enhanced Foreign Language Education. 2015; 49(5): 645–653.
[12] Doto, J. Supporting Knowledge Building with Informational Texts During Elementary Reading Instruction: A Design based Study. New Brunswic: Rutgers University; 2015.
[13] Engeström, Y. From teams to knots: Activity-theoretical studies of collaboration and learning at work. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 2008.
[14] Flynn, L. L. Developing critical reading skills through cooperative problem solving. The Reading Teacher. 1989; 42(9): 664-668.
[15] Gough, P. B., Tunmer, W. E. Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial & Special Education. 1986; 7(1): 6-10.
[16] Hadwin, A. L., Järvelä, S., Miller, M. Self-regulated, co-regulated, and socially shared regulation of learning. In: B. J. Zimmerman, D. H. Schunk (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. New York, NY: Routledge; 2011.
[17] Hadwin, A. F., Oshige, M. Self-regulation, coregulation, and socially shared regulation: Exploring perspectives of social in self-regulated learning theory. Teachers College Record. 2011; 113: 240–264.
[18] Hoover, W. A., Gough, P. B. The simple view of reading. Reading & Writing. 1990; 2(2): 127-160.
[19] Hussein, A. S. Analysis of the real situation of teaching reading comprehension to first year students at the department of English language and literature at Al-Zaytoonah Private University of Jordan. Asian Social Science. 2012; 8(4): 237-251.
[20] Iiskala, T., Vauras, M., Lehtinen, E., Salonen, P. Socially shared metacognition of dyads of pupils in collaborative mathematical problem-solving processes. Learning and Instruction. 2011; 21(3): 379–393.
[21] Johnson, D. Activity theory, mediated action and literacy: Assessing how children make meaning in multiple modes. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 2003; 10(1): 103-129.
[22] Kelly, M., Brian, L., Gary, K., Eric, M. Use of a social annotation platform for pre-class reading assignments in a flipped introductory physics class. Frontiers in Education. 2018; 3(8): 1-12.
[23] Kim, Y., Ma, J. H. The role of purposeful reading in L2 Learners’ reading comprehension, task motivation, and perceived difficulty. Studies in English Education. 2016; 21(1): 73-95.
[24] Leont’ev, A. N. Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1978.
[25] Leu, D.J., Zawilinski, L., Castek, J., Banerjee, M., Housand, B., Liu, Y. What is new about the new literacies of online reading comprehension? In: L. Rush, J. Eakle, A. Berger (Eds.). Secondary school literacy: What research reveals for classroom practices. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English; 2007.
[26] Lupo, S.M., Berry, A., Thacker, E., Sawyer, A., Merritt, J. Rethinking text sets to support knowledge building and interdisciplinary learning. The Reading Teacher. 2019; 73(4): 513-524.
[27] Miller, M., Hadwin, A. Scripting and awareness tools for regulating collaborative learning: Changing the landscape of support in CSCL. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015; 52: 573-588.
[28] Paris, S. G., Hamilton, E. E. The Development of Children’s Reading Comprehension. In: Israel, S. Duffy, G. (Eds). Handbook of Research on Reading Comprehension. New York, NY: Routledge; 2009.
[29] Pourkalhor, O., Kohan, N. Teaching reading comprehension through short stories in advance classes. Asian Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities. 2013; 2(2): 52-60.
[30] Rosenblatt, L. M. The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press; 1978.
[31] Rouet, J. F., Britt, M. A. Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In: M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, G. Schraw (Eds.). Text relevance and learning from text. Greenwich, CT: Information Age; 2011.
[32] Rouet, J. F., Britt, M. A., Durik, A. M. RESOLV: Readers' representation of reading contexts and tasks. Educational Psychologist. 2017; 52(3): 200-215.
[33] Scardamalia M., Bereiter C. Computer support for knowledge-building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 1993; 3(3): 265-283.
[34] Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C. Knowledge Building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.). Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006.
[35] Snow, C. E., the RAND Reading Group. Reading for understanding. Toward a R&D program for reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND; 2002.
[36] Swann, J., Allington, D. Reading groups and the language of literary texts: a case study in social reading. Language & Literature. 2009; 18(3): 247-264.
[37] Tabak, I. Synergy: a complement to emerging patterns of distributed scaffolding. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2004; 13(3): 305-335.
[38] Trott, B., Naik, Y. Finding good reads on goodreads. Reference & User Services Quarterly. 2012; 51(4): 319-323.
[39] Vlieghe, J., Vandermeersche, G., Soetaert, R. Social media in literacy education: Exploring social reading with pre-service teachers. New Media & Society. 2016; 18(5): 800-816.
[40] Volet, S., Summers, M., Thurman, J. High-level co-regulation in collaborative learning: How does it emerge and how is it sustained? Learning and Instruction. 2009; 19(2): 128–143.
[41] Vygotsky, L. S. Thought and language. Cambridge. MA: The MIT Press; 1986.
[42] Winne, P. H., Hadwin, A. F. Studying as self-regulated engagement in learning. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, A. Graesser (Eds.). Metacognition in educational theory and practice. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1998.
[43] Wu, L., Wu, Y. Adolescents' social reading: motivation, behaviour, and their relationship. The Electronic Library. 2017; 35(2): 246-262.
[44] Yamazumi, K. Engaging Children in Reading Activity Through Collaboration in a Japanese Elementary School: An Activity-Theoretical Case Study. In: Ng, C., Bartlett, B. (eds). Improving Reading and Reading Engagement in the 21st Century. Singapore: Springer; 2017.
[45] Zhang, J., Sun, Y. Reading for idea advancement in a grade 4 knowledge building community. Instructional Science. 2011; 39(4): 429-452.
[46] Zheng, L., Li, X., Huang, R. The effect of socially shared regulation approach on learning performance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 2017; 20(4): 35-46.
[47] Zimmerman, B. J. Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In: M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, M. Zeidner (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 2000.
Copyright © 2021 Chen Guo, Xiangdong Chen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License