This document provides information about a research poster session presenting a project that designed an intervention to equip secondary teachers to integrate informational text instruction with online and offline reading materials. The intervention was informed by research on foundational print literacy and new literacies of the internet. It was organized around five themes and aimed to improve students' learning from both online and offline reading. The poster session will be presented by three researchers from Michigan State University on February 22, 2009.

1. Handout
MEET THE RESEARCHERS
(Research Poster Session)
February 22, 2009
11:00am-12:30pm
Phoenix Convention Center – W102 A/B
2009 Annual Meeting of the International Reading Association—West
Phoenix, AZ
Preparing Teachers and Students for the New Literacies of the
Internet:
Identification of Effective Classroom Practices
Douglas K. Hartman, Jinjie Zheng, Parul M. Morsink
Michigan State University
dhartman@msu.edu, zhengji1@msu.edu, morsinkp@msu.edu
The purpose of this project was to design a proof-of-concept intervention that equips secondary
preservice teachers in science, mathematics, and English/language arts to flexibly integrate
informational text instruction with students reading off- and online material (Spiro, Collins, Thota, &
Feltovich, 2003). Recent studies indicate that readers use a number of different strategies to
comprehend texts in each medium (e.g., Hartman, Morsink, & Zheng, in press). Two complementary
areas of the research literature informed the intervention’s design: foundational print literacy (Snow
& Biancarosa, 2003; Phelps 2005) and new literacies of the Internet (Coiro, Knobel, Lankshear, &
Leu, 2008). The review and design process resulted in course syllabi and accompanying materials
organized around five themes: (a) current context—e.g., changes in the medium of reading; changes
in using the medium of reading (Hartman, Morsink, & Zheng, in press); (b) contrastive conceptions—
e.g., foundational literacy vs. new literacies; offline vs. online informational text (Beitzel, 2004;
Derry, Wilsman, & Hackbarth, 2007); (c) complementary practices—e.g., informational text structure
vs. website/webpage design structure; reciprocal teaching vs. Internet reciprocal teaching (Day,
2003); (d) multiple models—e.g., raw video vs. professionally edited video of ‘reciprocal teaching’
and ‘Internet reciprocal teaching’ (Ferdig, Hughes, Packard, & Pearson, 1998; Derry, Wilsman, &
Hackbarth, 2007); and (e) embedded action—e.g., plan, teach, and reflect on foundational literacy and
new literacies lessons carried out in professional development school settings (Gordon, Debus,
Dillon, & Arthur-Kelly, 2006). This approach to designing an instructional approach for informational
text yielded the first iteration of an intervention based on research for improving adolescents’
learning of subject matter from both off- and online reading material.
References
Beitzel, B. (2004). Designing contrasting video case activities to facilitate learning of complex
subject matter. Unpublished dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., Leu, D.J. (2008). Handbook of research on new literacies. New
York: Erlbaum.
Day, C. (2003). Teachers’ thinking—Intentions and practice: An action research perspective. In M.
Kompf & P. Denicolo (Eds.), Teacher thinking twenty years on: Revisting persisting
problems and advances in education (pp. 71-80). Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Derry, S.J., Wilsman, M.J., & Hackbarth, A.J. (2007). Using Contrasting Case Activities to Deepen
Teacher Understanding of Algebraic Thinking and Teaching. Mathematical Thinking and
Learning, 9(3) 305-329.
Ferdig, R. E., Hughes, J. H., Packard, B. W., Pearson, P. D. (1998). Expanding resources in teacher
education: The reading classroom explorer. Journal of Reading Education, 23(4), 30-31.

2. Handout
Gordon, C., Debus, R., Dillon, J., & Arthur-Kelly, M. (2006). Using action research to develop deep
learning outcomes within a preservice teacher education context. Educational Research and
Review, 1(9), 337-346.
Hartman, D.K., Morsink, P.M., & Zheng, J. (in press). From print to pixels: The evolution of cognitive
conceptions of reading comprehension. In B. Baker (Ed.), Multiple Perspectives on New
Literacies Research and Instruction. New York: Guilford.
Snow, C.E., & Biancarosa, G. (2003). Adolescent literacy and the achievement gap: What do we know
and where do we go from here? New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
Spiro, R. J., Collins, B. P., Thota, J. J., & Feltovich, P. J. (2003). Cognitive flexibility theory:
Hypermedia for complex learning, adaptive knowledge application, and experience
acceleration. Educational Technology, 43(5), 5-10.

3. Handout