Journal of Academic Development and Education JADE Issue 10 | Page 86

ARTICLE #6 | 87
86 | JADE
FABIENNE EMMERICH & ASH MURPHY
or the tutorial a print out of the judgment. There had been specific
instructions to do so. And second, after we gave them a paper copy
of the case headnote (a one page summary of the key facts and
rulings) the majority of students were reluctant to work with the
paper copy.
First puzzle: in our teaching we noticed that an increasing number
of students clearly demonstrate a preference for digital or screen
reading. This may be for various reasons: from ease of access to
digital texts through electronic reading lists to the cost of printing
for students as well as for the environment. We have also observed
a significant move from students reading on laptops to exclusively
using smartphones as a one-stop shop device for researching,
reading and note taking.
Long academic texts, judgments, articles or books are designed
with paper in mind. Rose (2011) focuses on the experiences of screen
reading texts designed for paper. E-books and .pdf documents’
page structures are experienced as inhibitive and irritating. The page
that is so functional and integral to the experience of typographical
space, on screen breaks up the text and disrupts the flow.
Rose (2011) also finds that focus or getting in focus is straightforward
when reading paper texts. But when reading digitally focus is
a continual effort. There are a number of things that divert our
attention. For instance digital reading requires us to swipe or scroll,
so part of our brain function is diverted to co-ordination. Moreover
the reader has to locate the change of the line after the scrolling of
the page (Rose, 2011). 6 Other research has suggested that students
tire more easily when reading on screen and complain of eye fatigue
which may lead to gaps in comprehension (Jeong, 2010).
This waterfall effect of digital space works well for apps, but it makes
it difficult for readers to produce “effective cognitive maps” of texts,
particularly long academic texts (Li et al., 2012). Readers experience
an increased sense of dislocation, problems with identifying sequence
in narratives and remembering details (Mangen and Kuiken, 2014).
Students’ focus on the screen first as a multiple platform and second
for reading long academic texts, we argue, may be creating barriers
to reading. To address this we need to encourage students to
engage with paper and to support students to develop reading skills
for typographical space. For typographic space is structured and
framed by the static page (Rose, 2011). This creates the physicality of
the text rich in contextual information, a physicality that stimulates
the senses (feel of the paper, the smell of old books) and reinforces a
connectedness to a scholarly community through the traces of other
6. Moreover the functionality of the screen presents a variety of distractions
that need to be consciously ignored or disabled (for instance notifications).
DIGITAL NATIVE FIRST YEAR LAW STUDENTS AND
THEIR READING SKILLS IN A POST READING WORLD
readers in the text (e.g. annotations in library books).
This connects to our second puzzle: the students’ reluctance to take
ownership of the paper text. During the reading workshop students
had two separate pieces of paper, the case headnote and their
worksheet. We found students would read the headnote and then
write on the worksheet. We also noticed that many students had
difficulty in understanding the facts of the case summarised in the
headnote. Many of them did not annotate or mark the paper text of
the headnote in any way to assist or enable their comprehension. They
kept the two documents separate. Yet, taking ownership of the text
is a key experience of reading on paper (Rose, 2011). We then used
this insight to guide our approach during the subsequent tutorial to
demonstrate the ways in which students could annotate and take
ownership of the text. Angela Rhead had prepared annotated scrolls
of the entire judgment that we brought along to the tutorial. We also
sat with students in small groups to demonstrate how to map texts.
The reading exercises were also an attempt to introduce students
to collective effort reading. The purpose of collective effort reading
is to create an environment of collective support where all those
participating do not feel isolated to the task (Murray, 2015). Each
student is encouraged and motivated to read, because the burden
appears to be shared. An added benefit is that students can also
discuss the reading and work through difficult concepts as a group.
On reflection collective effort reading was not as easy to sell to the
students as we thought. Encouraging proactive attitudes within the
student groups was challenging because the benefit of collective
effort reading was not immediately obvious to students. Yet, when
groups did manage to participate in the exercise the feedback was
generally one of surprised positivity. Reflecting on this it appears
vital to further develop and integrate more collective effort reading
into the module and to encourage students to meet outside of the
classroom.
Conclusion: Finding a Common Ground
We find that by maintaining the traditional model of teaching law we
are asking students to betray the world they were born into. It seems
that for many students the gap between the experiences of hypertext
reading to academic reading on screen or on paper is too big to
cross unsupported. Our reflections of our own reading practices
have shown that we adapt to particular reading environments: we
are fragmentary, easily distracted and superficial readers when
swiping, scanning and filtering web-based texts; yet, we work with,
annotate, mark, place spatial memory markers on paper texts. We
take ownership of the paper copy.