Running Head: TABLET SCREEN VS.

PRINT READING

Tablet Screen vs. Print Reading Comprehension among Fourth Grade Students
Stephanie Brook, Joyce Chan, John Oswald, Kevin Tyner
University of British Columbia

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

Abstract
Although education has been criticized for how slowly it has embraced technology, the
shift is nevertheless occurring. Teachers independently, and institutions as a whole, are looking
for ways to incorporate technology into the classroom in order to maximize the learning
experience. While early studies have shown reduced reading comprehension when using screens
rather than print, since the early 1990s, that gap has closed (Jabr, 2013). As technology becomes
more affordable, information access shifts progressively to online mediums and people grow
increasingly comfortable with reading on digital devices. One trend that is growing in the
education field is BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) practices in the classrooms. BYOD allows
for teaching and learning to occur in ways that it could not before. Not only does it open the
lines of communication between teachers and students, it also extends to administration and
parents. Regardless of how technology will be incorporated into the classroom, it is undeniable
that reading on a digital device is becoming the norm whether in or outside of the classroom.
This study explores the difference in reading comprehension, if any, between reading printed
text versus reading on a tablet for fourth grade students.

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

Objectives/Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to examine the implications of reading with an electronic
screen as compared to traditional paper texts at an international school currently running a
BYOD program. According to Stoop et al. (2013) All tests show that print is still the superior
medium for learning and digesting complicated and elaborate texts, while electronic screens are
appreciated for quick information gathering, communication and navigation (p.71).
Specifically, this study will investigate the relationship between how different media types
(electronic texts compared to traditional paper texts) impact the participants reading
comprehension when reading narrative texts.
Theoretical Frameworks
Print books are still prevalent in education. University students have shown a strong
inclination toward paper for longer, information-dense texts (Ackerman & Goldsmith, 2011;
Baron, 2015). Mangen & Tveit (2014) also found that avid teen readers seem to prefer paper
texts. However, some sub-groups in the same study, including boys and reluctant readers,
showed a preference for electronic reading, demonstrating that there may be a place in some
students minds for electronic texts.
Previous studies have mixed results for reading comprehension when students use paper
vs. digital reading material. Stoop, Kreutzer & Kircz (2013) found paper readers demonstrate
better comprehension when reading information-dense texts on a variety of screens and Mangen,
Walgermo, & Brnnick (2013) found that students who read print had better comprehension than
those who read on 15 inch LCD screens. Meanwhile, others (Margolin et al., 2013) found that
student comprehension does not necessarily suffer due to text medium when using an e-reader
device.

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

A number of reasons for differences in comprehension and reading speed are cited in the
literature. While some authors are focused on the positive possibilities of hyperlinks in learning
(Salmern, & Garca, 2012), others have discovered reader distraction and increased cognitive
load due to hyperlinks and scrolling actions (Mangen, Walgermo, & Brnnick, 2013), options
that are simply not present in print formats.
Screen and/or ambient illumination (Lin, Wang, & Kang, 2015; Benedetto, Carbone,
Drai-Zerbib, Pedrotti, & Baccino, 2014; Chang, Chou, & Shieh, 2013) and viewing
angle/ergonomics (Shieh & Lee, 2007) are also put forward as reasons for decreased reading
speed and comprehension. Some recent work has postulated that the human eye can adjust for
small differences in viewing angle (Perrin, Paill, & Baccino, 2014).
By isolating the medium as the independent variable through controlling for reading
ability, hypertext features, lighting, font size and scrolling through text, the current study will
attempt to determine if the medium itself is responsible for any difference in reading
comprehension among 4th grade students. While many earlier studies in the research community
have been done with a variety of screen formats (computer screens, e-readers etc.) and age
groups (high school and university students), this study will focus on tablets in the elementary
classroom.
There are two reasons for this choice. First, with BYOD policies becoming
commonplace, tablets are becoming the device of choice in classrooms due to their flexibility
and portability (Falloon, 2015). Second, studies of digital versus print reading with adult
learners may be subject to a cohort effect where subjects who have learned their reading skills
and strategies almost exclusively with print materials may be responsible for differences in
reading outcomes for electronic media. This suggests research with younger age groups raised

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

with tablet and touch screen technology may show less reading differences (Mangen & Kuiken,
2014). Therefore, tablets will be used to assess if there is a relationship between reading medium
(printed paper vs. tablet screen) and reading comprehension for 4th grade students.
Methodology
This research is a case study of fourth-grade students at GEMS World Academy
Switzerland. A cluster sampling technique will be used since we will be sampling all the fourth
grade students in this school (two classes).
Participants
Two classes of 18-20 Grade four students (ages 9-10) will participate in this research
study. The participants will be comprised of a balance of boys and girls from a variety of
different nationalities. English serves as the primary operating language for all participants who
understand and are fluent in the reading, writing, and speaking of English.
All students are exposed to the use of digital devices both in the classroom and at home.
This familiarity with technology ensures all participants are only being tested on reading
comprehension, and not the learning of a new technology as well.
All participants have normal visual acuity (20/20 vision), whether naturally or corrected
by optical means (i.e. glasses, etc.)
Independent Variable
Reading Medium: Print Text versus LCD Tablets

Experimental Design/Procedure

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

Pre-Test. Existing records such as report cards and standardized test scores will already
confirm that students are at the grade four reading level. However, as an additional
confirmation, a pre-test will be distributed to the participants. The pre-test will be a paper-based
text that will mirror the experiment text in all but content (see Reading Material under Apparatus
below), though content will be deemed comparable.
Students will also be timed by the researcher to determine how long it takes the
participants to read the text. This is done under the assumption that more time spent reading may
mean more difficulty comprehending the text. Thus, this additional variable may further shed
light on our research question. Participants will not be told that they are being timed, and a
researcher will do this inconspicuously. This is to mimic a natural reading environment and pace
so that the subject will not feel stressed to perform under a certain time frame (although other
studies have proven that, when a limited time is given, students perform equally well reading on
print and screen (Mangen, Walgermo, Brnnick, 2013).
A comprehension test on paper will be given to participants to determine their reading
comprehension. For a well-rounded picture of the subject's reading comprehension, the test will
consists of both multiple choice and short answer questions.
Experiment and Post Test. The students will be randomly assigned into two groups.
The control group will be given the experiment text in print format while the experimental group
will be given the experiment text in a digital format.
As with the pre-test, participants will be timed on their reading.
A comprehension test reflective of the content of the experimental text will be given to
students. This test will be deemed comparable in to the pre-test comprehension test. All
participants will be given both comprehension tests (pre-test and post-test) on paper.

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

Apparatus
Digital Device. The more popular size of 7-9" tablets* will be used in this experiment.
Devices will be set to "Reading Mode" to optimize reading conditions using an LCD screen.
Print Medium. Print text will be presented in the form of a booklet with a diagonal
measurement between 7-9 inches to closely resemble the dimension of the tablet.
Reading Material
Language. All text will be in English at the reading level for fourth grade students as
determined by the Board of Education.
Prose. For the purpose of this experiment, narrative text was selected.
Length. The length of the text will be 10 pages.
Text Layout. The reading material provided will be displayed double-spaced in Times
New Roman, size 12 font. All paragraphs and other page layouts will mirror the other between
print and digital text.
Pagination. Digital form of the material will be paginated and set to fit the screen so that
students will "flip the page" by tapping rather than zooming and/or scrolling.*
*Studies have argued that the act of scrolling is a distraction as students need to find
their place again each time they scroll (Margolin et al., 2013).
Linear text. The digital version of the text will be free of hyperlinks as these introduce a
variable that we do not want impacting the results.
Experimental Conditions
Location. To minimize any contamination by confounding variables, the participants
regular classroom will be used.

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

Ambient lighting. The room is well-lit through the means of natural light from windows
and/or fluorescent lights.
Head Tilt/Device Tilt. The angle of tilt* for both the subject's head and the device will
remain uncontrolled.
*Studies have shown that cycloversion (a rotation of the eyes on its axis) will naturally
adjust for any tilt (Perrin, Paill, & Baccino, 2014).
Seating. Seating will be stable, comfortable plastic chairs that are sized for students of
that age.
Distractions. Distractions will be removed or turned off such as any other screens or
sounds. Windows will be closed to minimize outside distraction and room temperature will be
comfortably set at the school standard of 21 degrees Celsius.
Data Collection and Analysis
Pre-test and post-test reading comprehension tests will be graded and compared. Reading
speed will also be compared as a supporting variable. The mean score of both groups will be
calculated to be statistically compared using an independent measures t-test.
Description of Data Sources
Students in a Pre-K to G12 private school in Etoy, Switzerland will be the participants in
this study. The private school is a for-profit institution, offering International Baccalaureate
education to students from the age of 3. Students from G2 to G5 are required to bring their own
iPad to school, and students in G6 to G12 are required to bring a laptop with them for school use.

For the purpose of this study, looking at the impact of screens on reading
comprehension, we will focus on Grade 4 as this is a year when students are beginning to make

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

significant gains in the area of reading comprehension and analysis of text. There are two
classes of 18-20 students at the Grade 4 level at this school. Students are equally distributed
across the two classes, in terms of ability and learning needs. Both classrooms have a teacher
and a teaching assistant, as well as additional support for English as an additional language
(ELA) students. Teachers involved in the study are required by their school to ensure technology
is being authentically integrated into their lessons. Prior administrative teacher evaluations
ensure the efficiency of technology integration used by teachers. Teachers implement the SAMR
model to guide their lesson planning using BYOD technology.
The schools leadership team is in full support of this study, and will use the results to
guide policymaking and practice at the school. Parents of the students in both classes will be
contacted in order to obtain their permission. Once their permission is secured, a message will
go home to parents with specifics about the study and what we hope to understand. Any students
whose parents do not wish to have them participate in the study will be given alternative
instruction during this time. Of the students participating in the study, one of these two
classrooms will use tablets and the other will use paper for the same unit on reading
comprehension. Identical printed assessments will be given to both control and experimental
groups at the end of the unit, and the results will be used for the purpose of our study. Results
will be shared with parents and teaching staff, and the conclusions will be used to guide the
schools policies in terms of digital integration.

Results and Conclusion

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

10

Even though the study has not yet been conducted, our goal is to understand the
difference in reading comprehension, if any, between reading printed text versus reading on a
tablet for fourth grade students. In addition, we hope tour study will produce enough qualitative
data to help teachers of GEM and other educators for future classroom research.
The results of our current study are unknown; however, previous studies have
demonstrated that different medium types provide a different results in terms of reading
comprehension. It is expected that by isolating the medium as the independent variable through
controlling for reading ability, hypertext features, lighting, font size and scrolling through text,
that we will be able to collect enough quantitative data to determine how fourth grade students of
GEM are affected by the choice of medium types (paper or electronic screen).
Educational Significance
Electronic texts are increasingly being used in school BYOD programs in a variety of
forms: tablets, laptops, desktops and Smart boards, to name a few. As educational practice shifts
from the use of paper towards personal electronic devices, it is important to consider the impact
this has on the learner. Therefore, the significance of this study and its possible findings
regarding the impact of screens on reading comprehension is one of great significance.
The results of this study, once available, could immediately inform decisions about the use of
screens in classrooms for reading comprehension purposes. Many schools are in the decisionmaking stages of determining whether to allow students to bring their own devices to school.
The results of this study could have a significant impact on policy-making in both the private and
public sectors. Finally, this study will impact larger-scale investigations into the use of screens
in education in general.

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

11

Determining the nature of any relationship between tablet use and reading comprehension
will shed light on the reading medium (print vs. BYOD tablet) as a variable in future classroom
research. In addition to providing fresh information about reading comprehension when using
tablets for elementary students raised with touch screen technology, results from this study could
also lend credence to earlier studies' findings that text features, hyperlinking and other potential
learning/aids distractions need to be more carefully considered and designed in electronic text
media for maximum results (Hahnel, Goldhammer, Naumann, & Krohne, 2016; Salmern, &
Garca, 2012). This study could also provide valuable insight into the role tablets can play in
lesson planning for elementary teachers in tablet-based BYOD environments--in particular, the
use of tablets for narrative reading in elementary school classrooms.

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

12

References
Ackerman, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Metacognitive regulation of text learning: on screen
versus on paper. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(1), 18.
Baron, Naomi S. (2015). Words Onscreen: The Fate of Reading in a Digital World. (1st edition
ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Benedetto, S., Carbone, A., Drai-Zerbib, V., Pedrotti, M., & Baccino, T. (2014). Effects of
luminance and illuminance on visual fatigue and arousal during digital reading.
Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 112-119. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.023
Chang, P., Chou, S., & Shieh, K. (2013). Reading performance and visual fatigue when using
electronic paper displays in long-duration reading tasks under various lighting conditions.
Displays, 34(3), 208-214. doi:10.1016/j.displa.2013.06.001
Falloon, G. (2015). What's the difference? Learning collaboratively using iPads in conventional
classrooms. Computers & Education, 84, 62-77.
Hahnel, C., Goldhammer, F., Naumann, J., & Krohne, U. (2016). Effects of linear reading, basic
computer skills, evaluating online information, and navigation on reading digital text.
Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 486. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.042
Lin, Chih-Long, Mao-Jiun J. Wang, and Yen-Yu Kang. "The Evaluation of Visuospatial
Performance between Screen and Paper." Displays 39 (2015): 26-32. Web.
Mangen, A., Walgermo, B., & Brnnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus
computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of
Educational Research, 58, 61-68. Retrieved from
http://www.academia.edu/3055159/Mangen_A._Walgermo_B._and_Br
%C3%B8nnick_K._2013_._Reading_linear_texts_on_paper_versus_computer_screen_Ef
fects_on_reading_comprehension
Mangen, A., & Kuiken, D. (2014). Lost in an iPad: Narrative engagement on paper and tablet.
Scientific Study of Literature, 4(2), 150-177.Retrieved 30 March 2016, from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anne_Mangen/publication/269692668_Mangen_A.
__Kuiken_D._(2014)_Lost_in_an_iPad_Narrative_engagement_on_paper_and_tablet/lin
ks/552b5b730cf29b22c9c1a7a3.pdf
Mangen, A. and Tveit, K. (2014). A joker in the class: Teenage readers' attitudes and preferences
to reading on different devices. Library & Information Science Research, 36, 179-184.
Margolin, Sara J., et al. "Ereaders, Computer Screens, Or Paper: Does Reading Comprehension
Change Across Media Platforms?" Applied Cognitive Psychology 27.4 (2013): 512-9.
Web.

TABLET SCREEN VS. PRINT READING

13

Perrin, J., Paill, D., & Baccino, T. (2014). Reading tilted: Does the use of tablets impact
performance? an oculometric study. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 339-345.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.033
Salmern, L., & Garca, V. (2012). Children's reading of printed text and hypertext with
navigation overviews: The role of comprehension, sustained attention, and visuo-spatial
abilities. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 47(1), 33-50.
doi:10.2190/EC.47.1.b
Shieh, Kong-King, and Der-Song Lee. "Preferred Viewing Distance and Screen Angle of
Electronic Paper Displays." Applied Ergonomics 38.5 (2007): 601-8. Web.
Stoop, Judith, Paulien Kreutzer, and Joost G. Kircz. "Reading and Learning from Screens Versus
Print: A Study in Changing Habits: Part 2 - Comparing Different Text Structures on Paper
and on Screen." New Library World 114.9/10 (2013): 371-83. Web.