Abstract
This quantitative study aims to investigate the relationship between e-education and reading comprehension skills acquisition. It also examines if the previous relationship may impact students’ results in the exams. It also analyses the relationship between students’ knowledge in ICT and their perception and acceptance of online education. To collect data, A survey was sent to students to measure their perception of and satisfaction with online learning. Moreover, the marks of 105 students in an on-campus test were compared to the marks of another one they did online during the pandemic. The study agreed with the previous studies that e-learning can impact the reading skills positively and that students are getting aware of its educational benefits. On the other hand, the study did not agree with other studies about students’ knowledge of ICT and how it can positively impact their perception of online education. The study showed that although secondary students have sufficient knowledge of ICT, they do not have positive perceptions of online education.
Purpose - to investigate the relationship between e-education and acquiring reading comprehension skills, and if this may impact students’ results in the exams.
Methodology - A quantitative study in which a survey and the scores of two reading exams are analysed.
Findings - this study agreed with other studies about the positive impact of e-learning with some differences regarding students’ satisfaction with IT.
Implications - teachers can integrate interactive websites within instruction and using online games and activities can make students more attentive and less distracted.
Originality/value - although most of the studies have proved that there is a positive relationship between the quality of ICT services and students’ satisfaction with online education, this study disagrees as unlike most of the studies, the study in hand was conducted in a secondary school, not in a university.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
![](https://media.springernature.com/w215h120/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs40299-015-0246-1/MediaObjects/40299_2015_246_Fig1_HTML.gif)
Keywords
1 Introduction
During Covid19, most of the world has switched to distance education in fear of more spread of the pandemic. This sudden change has put most of school students in confusion which had an impact on their schooling attitude, hence their exam results. In the UAE, the government has tried their best to eliminate, or at least, lessen this fear by providing teachers with trainings required to overcome these non-precedential circumstances. They also provided schools with facilities and equipment to ensure students’ easy accessibility of resources and materials needed to continue learning as smoothly as possible (Ati & Guessoum, 2010).
Reading comprehension is a complex skill taught online as a part of the English course delivered to secondary students. It requires connecting points to create a meaning or meanings that are partially derived from prior knowledge. It is an everyday skill that people practice all the time intentionally or unintentionally, yet at school, students should master reading comprehension skills that are developed in classrooms to understand all subjects and pass their exams (Destari, 2010).
1.1 Research Questions
-
1.
Does on-line education have a significant relationship with students’ levels in reading comprehension?
-
A.
Is there a significant difference between the scores of reading exams (on-campus and online)?
-
B.
Is there a relationship between the total scores of the two exams and the reading skills mastered in each learning situation?
-
A.
-
2.
Do students’ level of Knowledge in ICT and the Benefits of online education have an impact on their Students’ Rating of Online Education?
2 Literature Review
2.1 Conceptual Framework
Many concepts can be discussed in this section to give a comprehensive account of this topic such as: reading comprehension and online education. Reading Comprehension is the capability to read, process, and comprehend written material (Butterfuss et al., 2020). Online Education is the use of information technologies and communications to assist in the development and acquisition of knowledge from faraway areas (Basilaia & Kvavadze, 2020).
2.2 Theoretical Framework
Many theories have discussed reading comprehension, online learning and students’ perception and attitudes. However, the study in hand will discuss the Structural Theory, The Digital Native Theory, and Behaviourism.
The Structural Theory:
It is hard for L2 students to understand written texts for many reasons such as the limited vocabulary knowledge and the text structure and cohesion. Moreover, the text features can influence cognitive process that govern reading comprehension (Jake Follmer & Sperling, 2018) as shown in Fig. 1.
The Digital Native Theory:
It is believed that nowadays students are digital natives as they were born during the digital revolution (Von der Heiden et al., 2011), so they prefer working and gaming online.
Behaviourism:
A behaviour can be due to some external and/or internal causes (Whiteley, 1961). In this case, the external cause is the sudden shift to online education. On the other hand, Skinner (2011) identified Behaviourism as the philosophy of human behaviour. According to him, behaviour is not about cause-and-effect connection, but it is about a set of functional actions that take place in a certain order such as the pandemic, social distancing and e-learning.
2.3 Literature Review
The Benefits of Online Learning on Reading Comprehension: Recently, using technology has been proved successful in improving students’ levels of performance in many subjects including reading comprehension. Many studies have been conducted to identify the type of impact of online education on reading comprehension. The studies of Zidat and Djoudi (2010) and Ciampa (2012), have proved that using technology, multimedia and games increased students’ opportunities to gain more reading skills. Other studies have revealed the important role of online reading in improving the level of performance of poor readers which, consequently, improved their reading comprehension skills.
The Impact of Students’ Satisfaction on Their Levels of Performance: Many studies have confirmed the positive relationship between students’ satisfaction and behaviour, and their levels of performance in different contexts. In their studies, Sapri et al. (2009), Dhaqane and Afrah (2016) proved that teaching and learning methods used in the higher education institutes had a significant impact on students’ satisfaction which consequently improved their levels of performance. Another study. Furthermore, the study conducted on Vietnamese College students, Salehi et al. (2014) found out that students with ICT knowledge can feel comfortable learning online.
3 Methodology
This quantitative study will examine the impact of online education on students’ reading comprehension skills and the impact of their ICT knowledge on their satisfaction and behaviour towards online learning. To do so, the study will compare 10th graders’ results in reading comprehension prior and during distance learning, and analyse the data collected via a survey that will be dispatched to the same students.
3.1 Quantitative Research Paradigms
Paradigms can be considered the ‘worldview’ or ‘sets of beliefs’ that govern the research approaches and methods and lead to answer the research questions (Cohen et al., 2018). It is suitable to discuss as it underpins the quantitative approach.
post-Positivism: This theory underpins the quantitative approach as it is concerned with numbers and statistics. According to Alakwe (2017), post-positivists believe that knowledge is extracted from data that is statistically analysed. This knowledge can be generalizable in similar contexts if showing the same reality observed. This theory is also concerned with decreasing human bias by testing pure data that is not yet interpreted by people.
3.2 Research Methods
There are two instruments used in this study: the first one is 105 10th graders’ scores in 2 reading comprehension quizzes. The first one was administered at school before the pandemic and the second one was administered online during the pandemic to determine the significance in difference of means using descriptive data and ‘Paired t-test’ on SPSS.
The second tool was a survey to collect data from the same students regarding their attitudes toward the online education phenomenon, the challenges they might have faced while implementing the online education and the level of satisfaction. The survey was conducted anonymously to guarantee objectivity and privacy. The survey used Likert scale in all questions for easier collection of responses.
The survey was adopted from two published studiesFootnote 1: (Simpson, 2012; Al-Azawei & Lundqvist, 2015). Surveys are used to collect data in the quantitative approach due to the vast development in technology (Mathers et al., 2009).
3.3 Sampling
A sample is a part of the population chosen to represent the whole population. The population targeted is 10th graders, and the sample is 105 female students in a private school in Ajman. There are many types of sampling, but the researcher used the convenience sampling technique due to the nature and logistics of the study during the pandemic (Acharya et al., 2013).
4 Result Analysis and Discussion
The study showed that there is a significant positive relationship between online education and students’ improvement in reading skill, yet their satisfaction with and perception of online education is not necessarily congruent with the ICT services provided.
4.1 Question No. 1 and Sub Questions A&B
To answer Q.1, sub-questions A&B will be answered first to be able to find out if there is an impact of online teaching on students’ levels of performance in reading comprehension skills.
Sub-Question A: Is there a significant difference between the scores of reading exams (on-campus and online)? The null hypotheses are: H0: “there is no significant difference in mean between the scores of on-campus reading test and the online reading test” while the alternative hypothesis (H1) is: “there is a significant difference in mean between the scores of on-campus reading test and the online reading test’. A ‘paired t-test’ was conducted to confirm or reject the null hypothesis (H0) (Table 1).
As the significance factor is P =.732 is higher than α = .05 (P > α), it means that there is no statistically significant difference in means of the scores of the two tests, so the previous results failed statistically to reject the null hypothesis which states that “there is no significant difference in mean between the scores of on-campus’ reading test and the online reading test” with 95% confidence.
Sub Question B: Is there a relationship between the total scores of the two exams and the reading skills mastered in each learning context? A correlation test will be used to answer the question.
To determine the relationship between the previous variables, correlation tests will be used. The null hypothesis (H0) is “there is no significant relationship between reading skills acquired in each educational context and the tests conducted”. P = 0, while the alternative hypothesis (H1) is: “there is a significant relationship between reading skills acquired in each educational contexts and the tests conducted” P ≠ 0).
The following Tables 2 and 3, show an overall statistically significant positive relationship between the acquired reading skills and the scores of reading tests whether on-campus or online. There is also a significant difference in means between the reading skills acquired online and those acquired at school in favor for the online context.
Does on-line education have a significant relationship with students’ levels in reading comprehension? The percentages of students’ attendance will be used as a reflection of the impact of e-learning as students used to join classes every day. The hypotheses of this questions are the null hypothesis (H0) is: “There is no significant relationship between the percentage of students’ attendance and their scores in the online reading test”. (p = 0), and the alternative hypothesis (H1) is: “There is a significant relationship between the percentage of students’ attendance and their scores in the online reading test” (p ≠ 0). A Pearson correlation test was used to confirm or reject the null hypothesis (Table 4).
Coefficient (r) is 0.346. This shows a positive relationship, and it cannot be considered a relatively strong relationship as it is not close to +1. The p value is .001 < alpha value .05. This means that the results statistically reject the null hypothesis and confirms the alternative hypothesis (H1): “Statistically, there is a significant relationship between the percentage of students’ attendance and their scores in the online reading test” Consequently, all the previous results of question 1 and the sub questions A&B prove the fact that there is an overall positive significant relationship between online education and reading comprehension skills acquired and the overall online reading tests score. The previous results conform with Zidat and Djoudi (2010) and Ciampa (2012) that the online education is beneficial in relation to reading comprehension skills acquisition.
4.2 Do Students’ Level of Knowledge in ICT and the Benefits of Online Education Have an Impact on Students’ Rating of Online Education?
A survey was conducted on n = (105) to measure students’ knowledge in and satisfaction with ICT. The null hypothesis (H0) is: “There is no significant correlation between students’ level of knowledge in ICT and their Recognition of the online education benefits on their overall rating of online education”. The alternative hypothesis (H1) is: “There is a significant correlation between students’ level of knowledge in ICT and their Recognition of the online education benefits on their overall rating of online education.”
A Linear Regression test was conducted to get answers to the previous question (Table 5).
The previous table shows that: P value of the predictor ICT is .432 > alpha value .05 which means that the relationship between ICT and students’ satisfaction is not significant, yet the relationship between the Benefits of online education and satisfaction is significant as P =.001 < α = .05, so there is a significant relationship between the benefits of online education and students’ satisfaction which conforms with Whiteley (1961) that their satisfaction (effect) is a result of the benefits they are aware of (cause), yet there is no significant relationship between ICT knowledge and students’ satisfaction. This agrees with Skinner (2011) as students’ negative behaviour and perception of online education is not a result of their lack of knowledge, and it can be a philosophy that has emerged due to other emotional and social factors such as the lack of socialization caused by distance learning.
5 Conclusion, Implications, and Research Significance
Conducting the previous tests, some findings can be highlighted, and some conclusions can be made accordingly.
5.1 Conclusion
The tests conducted show that:
-
There is a significant impact of online learning on improving the reading comprehension tests’ scores.
-
These results have confirmed that there is a significant impact of reading skills gained in both educational contexts and the reading tests scores in both contexts.
-
The study also has proven that there is a positive relation between students’ satisfaction with online education and their improvement in reading skills, yet the relationship between students’ perceptions of online education and the ICT services provided to them.
5.2 Implications and Suggestions
Implications: The hypotheses confirmed in this study can indicate that the types of teaching materials can have a great impact on students’ satisfaction and performance. Using versatile activities and different websites can decrease the boredom and monotony that students might feel in actual classrooms.
Suggestions: Using creative reading material can motivate students to study and practice, so it will be much better to use online reading comprehension resources and activities even after going back to school. Moreover, students can have the chance to study in virtual classes and practice e-reading activities even when they are back to school for at least one school class. This will enable students to enjoy reading and practicing using reading comprehension skills more effectively.
5.3 Research Significance
The results of the study agree partially with the previous studies in that domain, yet it does not agree with the results of other studies about the impact of ICT services on students’ satisfaction with online education. As most studies focused on tertiary students. This study can encourage other researchers to further investigate the context of high school students’ satisfaction and its relationship with ICT services which might reveal new dimensions that might enrich research and become new references to other scholars.
Notes
- 1.
“Learner Differences in Perceived Satisfaction of an Online Learning: an Extension to the Technology Acceptance Model in an Arabic Sample” and “Student Perceptions of Quality and Satisfaction in Online Education”.
References
Acharya, A., Prakash, A., Saxena, P., & Nigam, A. (2013). Sampling: why and how of it? Indian Journal of Medical Specialities, 4(2), 330–333.
Alakwe, K.O. (2017). Positivism and knowledge inquiry: from scientific method to media and communication research. Specialty Journal of Humanities and Cultural Science, 2(3), 38–46. Accessed May 31, 2021.
Al-Azawei, A. & Lundqvist, K. (2015) Learner differences in perceived satisfaction of an online learning: an extension to the technology acceptance model in an Arabic sample. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 13(5), 412–430. Accessed June 6, 2021.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
Aliaga, M. & Gunderson, B. (2003). Interactive statistics (2nd ed.). Pearson education, Inc.
Ati, M. & Guessoum, N. (2010). E-learning in the United Arab Emirates. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233428047_E-Learning_in_the_United_Arab_Emirates. Accessed May 25, 2021.
Boudalia, M. (2018). Effect of early exposure to technology on student satisfaction with online education. Ph.D. in Management and Technology. Walden University.
Butterfuss, R., Kim, J. & Kendeou, P. (2020). Reading comprehension. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Accessed May 28, 2021.
Cavanaugh, C., Barbour, M. & Clark, T. (2009). Research and practice in K-12 online learning: a review of open access literature. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(1).
Basilaia, G. & Kvavadze, D. (2020). Transition to online education in schools during a SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in Georgia. Pedagogical Research, 5(4). Accessed June 20, 2022.
Ciampa, K. (2012). ICANREAD. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(1), 27–59.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education. Routledge.
Coiro, J. (2011). Predicting reading comprehension on the internet. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(4), 352–392.
D’Elia, E. (2005). Using the results of qualitative surveys in quantitative analysis. SSRN Electronic Journal.
Destari, D. (2010). The effectiveness of internet-based material to teach reading comprehension viewed from learning motivation. graduate degree. Sebelas Maret University Surakarta.
Dhaqane, M. & Afrah, N. (2016). Satisfaction of students and academic performance in Benadir university. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(24), 59–63. Accessed June 5, 2021.
Evans, J., & Mathur, A. (2005). The value of online surveys. Internet Research, 15(2), 195–219.
Fidalgo, P., Thormann, J., Kulyk, O. & Lencastre, J. (2020). Students’ perceptions on distance education: a multinational study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 1–18. Accessed June 13, 2021.
Jake Follmer, D. & Sperling, R. (2018). Interactions between reader and text: contributions of cognitive processes, strategy use, and text cohesion to comprehension of expository science text. Learning and Individual Differences, 67, 177–187. Accessed November 24, 2021.
Keegan, D. (1996). Foundations of distance education.
Mathers, N., Fox, N. & Hunn, A. (2009). Surveys and questionnaires. NIHR RDS for the East Midlands/Yorkshire & Humber. Accessed June 14, 2021.
Rezaee, A. & Sharbaf Shoar, N. (2011). Investigating the effect of using multiple sensory modes of glossing vocabulary items in a reading text with multimedia annotations. English Language Teaching, 4(2), 25. Accessed June 4, 2021.
Ridzuan, A., Yunus, M., Abdullah, M., Bakar, M. & Ramlan, A. (2018). The relationship between students satisfaction and their academic performance among public relations degree students in UiTM Alor Gajah Melaka. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(10), 874–882. Accessed June 5, 2021.
Salehi, H., Shojaee, M. & Sattar, S. (2014). Using E-learning and ICT courses in educational environment: a review. English Language Teaching, 8(1), 63–70. Accessed June 13, 2021.
Sapri, M., Kaka, A. & Finch, E. (2009). Factors that influence student’s level of satisfaction with regards to higher educational facilities services. Malaysian Journal of Real Estate, 4(1), 34–51. Accessed June 5, 2021.
Simpson, J. (2012). Student perceptions of quality and satisfaction in online education. Doctor of Philosophy. University of Alabama.
Skinner, B. (2011). About behaviorism. New York: Random House
Sobh, R., & Perry, C. (2006). Research design and data analysis in realism research. European Journal of marketing, 40(11/12), 1194–1209.
Sterling, K. (2015). Student satisfaction with online learning. Ph.D. in Philosophy. University Of California, Santa Barbara.
Surahman, E. & Sulthoni. (2020). Student satisfaction toward quality of online learning in Indonesian higher education during the Covid-19 pandemic. In 6th international conference on education and technology. Accessed May 28, 2021. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9276630
van den Broek, P., Rapp, D., & Kendeou, P. (2005). Integrating memory-based and constructionist processes in accounts of reading comprehension. Discourse Processes, 39(2–3), 299–316.
Von der Heiden, B., Fleischer, S., Richert, A., & Jeschke, S. (2011). Theory of digital natives in the light of current and future E-learning concepts. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 6(2), 37.
Whiteley, C. (1961). II—behaviourism. Mind, LXX(278), 164–174.
Zidat, S., & Djoudi, M. (2010). Effects of an online learning on EFL university students’ English reading comprehension. International Review on Computers and Software, 5(2), 186–192.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
El Haddad, R.A., Salhieh, S.M.I. (2023). A Quantitative Study on the Impact of Online Learning on Reading Comprehension Skills. In: Al Marri, K., Mir, F., David, S., Aljuboori, A. (eds) BUiD Doctoral Research Conference 2022. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 320. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-27462-6_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-27462-6_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-27461-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-27462-6
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)