Category: ETL533

Prior to the commencement of ‘Literature in Digital Environments’ I believed that I had a decent understanding of what constitutes digital literature. In my blog post ETL533 Assessment 1: Reflections on Digital Literature in the Classroom, I considered my previous experience with digital literature, including storybook apps and connected that to my learning from Module 1 (Crombie, 2022a) where I discovered that not all digital features enhance the experience of digital literature. As the unit progressed I realised just how much more there was to the subject than I had initially believed.

I found that the more I read, the more critical I have become when evaluating digital literature for use in the classroom, making sure to assess if the digital aspects add or detract (Dobler, 2013) from the text. I have taken on board both Yakota and Teale’s (2014), and Walsh’s (2013) prompts for evaluating digital literature and used simplified versions (Crombie, 2022b) to review a variety of digital literature in assessment 2 (Experiencing Digital Literature). I found that using the same questions to evaluate multiple pieces of digital literature was limiting and that there can be no set evaluation of digital literature just as there is no one set of questions that effectively evaluate the quality of print literature because they all vary in audience, purpose, and experience. The main consideration is if the digital features support the story and is a piece of quality literature (Crombie, 2022c).

Learning about, and reviewing, digital literature did not prepare me for the extent of the technical challenges of creating my hypertext story, Little Red. Ideally, incorporating a way for students to help co-author the narrative and add to what is being read would enhance the experience (Serafini et al., 2015) and move it along the Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, Redefinition (SAMR) model (Puentedura, 2011) into the modification and redefinition sections. The many possible digital features involving animation, text, film and game like interactive features (Sargeant, 2015) have helped me realise that creating a piece of digital literature on your own may not produce the best outcome and that the different facets of knowledge and skills required are more suited to a team effort.

Based on my digital story telling project proposal, ala_muti (2022) suggested the possibility of including comprehension questions at the end of my digital text for students to justify why they chose a particular ending. I took the concept of seeking feedback on board and provided a link to a google form survey with a small number of simple questions about the students engagement with, and enjoyment of, the story. Further, to support my audience of year 1 and 2 students I used the Chrome extension Mote to add audio for each question in the google form which complemented the read to me option of the main text.

Amy (2022) suggested having students construct their own ending to the story and including instructions on how to use Book Creator for their own creations. As the app Book Creator is already used widely throughout my school I felt that any specific instructions would be better in a face-to-face teaching context, so that responses could be provided within the context of the classroom. I did take on board the concept of students constructing their own story ending by commenting on how the text may be used as a prompt for students to write their own endings to familiar stories (Crombie, 2022d) and would work well in a narrative teaching unit.

I see digital literature as another tool to engage and enhance the reading stamina of young readers and believe it will continue to evolve (Allan, 2017). It is our job as teachers to evolve with it in order to help students continue to develop the necessary literacy skills for their future. The role of the teacher is critical with Walker et al (2010) suggesting that it is difficult for students to transfer their digital skills and knowledge from informal to formal situations without teacher guidance.

The knowledge I have gained from this subject has demonstrated that the teacher librarian has a critical role to play in incorporating digital literature into the school library catalogue where it can be easily searched and found by students. It is currently a gap in our school library that would significantly benefit the future learning of students.

Although there is some evidence that reading on screens may negatively impact comprehension and cause slower reading (Jabr, 2013), devices and screens are now part of daily life and students need to be taught to use them in ways that not only enhance their experiences but help them develop life skills. I firmly believe that using a balance of both print and digital literature is required for students to be successful 21st century learners and thinkers. When students read and create their own digital literature they are practising skills and using tools they will encounter in the world beyond school (Tackvic, 2012).

 

References

ala_muti. (2022, September 10). I think this is a wonderful idea! [Comment on blog post “ETL533 Digital storytelling project proposal”]. A Journey into Teacher Librarianship. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/belindac/2022/09/04/etl533-digital-storytelling-project-proposal/

Allen, C. (2017). Digital fiction: ‘Unruly object’ or literary artefact? English in Australia, 52(2), 21-27.

Amy. (2002, September 14). I think your idea of an interactive story using Book Creator is wonderful [Comment on blog post “ETL533 Digital storytelling project proposal”]. A Journey into Teacher Librarianship. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/belindac/2022/09/04/etl533-digital-storytelling-project-proposal/

Crombie, B. (2022a, July 24). ETL533 Assessment 1: Reflections on digital literature in the classroom. A Journey into Teacher Librarianship. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/belindac/2022/07/24/etl533-assessment-1-reflections-on-digital-literature-in-the-classroom/

Crombie, B. (2022b, August 22). Digital literature review 1. A Journey into Teacher Librarianship. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/belindac/2022/08/22/digital-literature-review-1/

Crombie, B. (2022c, August 22). ETL533 Assessment 2 part B: Critical reflection. A Journey into Teacher Librarianship. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/belindac/2022/08/22/etl533-assessment-2-part-b-critical-reflection/

Crombie, B. (2022d, October 3). ETL533 Assessment 4, part A: Context of the digital story telling project. A Journey into Teacher Librarianship. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/belindac/2022/10/02/etl533-assessment-4-part-a-context-of-the-digital-story-telling-project/

Dobler, E. (2013). Looking beyond the screen: Evaluating the quality of digital books. Reading Today, 30(5), 20-21.

Jabr, F. (2013, April 11). The reading brain in the digital age: The science of paper versus screens. Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/

Puentedura, R. (2011). A Brief Introduction to TPCK and SAMR – Hippasus. Retrieved from http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2011/12/08/BriefIntroTPCKSAMR.pdf

Sargeant, B. (2015). What is an ebook? What is a book app? And why should we care? An analysis of contemporary digital picture books. Children’s Literature in Education, 46(4), 454-466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10583-015-9243-5

Serafini, F., Kachorsky, D. & Afuilera, E. (2015). Picture books 2.0: Transmedial features across narrative platforms. Journal of Children’s Literature, 41(2), 16-24.

Tackvic, C. (2012). Digital storytelling: Using technology to spark creativity. The Educational Forum, 76(4), 426.

Walker, S., Jameson., & Ryan, M. (2010). Skills and strategies for e-learning in a participatory culture. In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham & S. Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 212-224). Routledge.

Walsh, M. (2013). Literature in a digital environment. In L. McDonald (Ed.), A literature companion for teachers. (pp. 181-194). Primary English Teaching Association (PETAA).

Yokota, J. & Teale, W. H. (2014). Picture books and the digital world: Educators making informed choices. The Reading Teacher, 34(6). https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1262 

Little Red is a choose your own adventure style story aimed at engaging year 1 and 2 students in independent reading. The story is a re-telling of the traditional tale Little Red Riding Hood offering choices for the reader to make, via hyperlinks, to multiple different endings. The story and presentation style were chosen in response to a need for students to increase their stamina and engage in independent reading.

Reading for pleasure is a priority in the Victorian Curriculum, as shown in the description for English at year 1 and 2 which states, “Students engage with a variety of texts for enjoyment.” (Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority [VCAA], n.d., para. 2). Little Red fulfils this part of the curriculum as it is a familiar tale that encourages engagement from students with varying abilities. Enjoying reading is an important stepping stone to increasing literacy among children. Ghalebandi and Noorhidawati (2019) explain that time spent reading impacts on reading motivation and achievement. Therefore, the use of quality literature, digital or otherwise, to increase student stamina should be a focus for teachers.

Increasing student engagement and stamina when reading for pleasure was front of mind in the creation of Little Red. The text was created for students, familiar with using iPad apps, to read digital literature as part of the independent reading portion of the Reading Workshop. Observations of students reading books on iPad apps found they rapidly tapped through to the end of the story without reading or listening to the text, indicating that their engagement in the text and stamina for reading digitally was limited. Hypertext functionality was chosen for this project due to the potential for the interactivity to help engage and increase the reading stamina of young readers.
Giving students choice to determine the direction of the narrative is the key to their engagement with the story (TEDx Talks, 2013). The hypertext options within Little Red are limited to two so the reader is not too distracted and stays immersed in the story (James & De Kock, 2013). The choices are mostly presented as pictures with captions to support developing readers. Re-telling Little Red Riding Hood as a hypertext narrative with multiple endings prompts students to re-read the text multiple times to find all possible endings. This supports Loh et al. (2022) who suggests that students may increase their attitude towards reading when given the opportune to re-read familiar texts.

The ability to hyperlink was a key reason Book Creator was chosen as the platform for Little Red. Book Creator contains other digital features that are especially appropriate for year 1 and 2 students, with the ability for the text to be read aloud as each word is highlighted a deciding factor. These key features allow less confident readers to gain enjoyment for the story whilst also supporting their vocabulary and fluency skills, while more confident readers can engage with the text without the read aloud feature which can be turned off. The ‘read to me’ feature and the hypertext were determined as the most appropriate digital features of Little Red as including other superfluous features such as background music would not enhance the narrative and could distract the reader from the meaning of the story (Dobler, 2013).

Canva was the graphic design tool used to create the images in the text. This platform was chosen as it allows its Content License Agreement images to be used in multiple ways and published for both personal and commercial use (Canva, 2022). It was also flexible, easy to use and offers images suitable for all age groups.

Little Red has been designed to be used in a multitude of ways in my school environment, including;
• lessons on reading enjoyment and creating a reading identity
• alignment with digital texts already used through apps available on school iPads.
• ability to display the book on an interactive screen to the whole class that promotes discussions using the teaching strategy ‘turn and talk’ to decide on which hyperlink to choose can be used to create a more social aspect to reading
• reading in pairs to promote discussion about the possible options in the story that provides opportunities for students to practise their speaking and listening skills as well as negotiate with or persuade their partner
• Little Red can also be used as an impetus for students to engage with creative writing and write their own alternative endings to familiar stories.
• the possibility of adding it to the library to start the schools digital literature collection searchable by the catalogue.

The text Little Red, takes advantage of the digital literature offerings that best support the needs of the school to increase the engagement and stamina of student reading to not only improve their reading skills but develop an enjoyment of reading and desire for further reading adventures.

References
Canva. (2022). Canva’s Content License Agreement. Canva. https://www.canva.com/policies/content-license-agreement/

Dobler, E. (2013). Looking beyond the screen: Evaluating the quality of digital books. Reading Today, 30(5), 20-21.

Ghalebandi, S. G., & Noorhidawati, A. (2019). Engaging children with pleasure reading: The e-reading experience. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(8), 1213–1237. https://doi-org.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/10.1177/0735633117738716

James, R. & De Kock, L. (2013). The digital David and the Gutenberg Goliath: the rise of the ‘enhanced’ e-book. English Academy Review, 30(1), 107-123.

Loh, C. E., Gan, S., & Mounsey, S. (2022). What do children want to read? A case study of how one primary school library supported reading for pleasure. Journal of Library Administration, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2022.2117955

TEDx Talks. (2013, May 22). Blurring the lines: Storytelling in a digital world: Adam Stackhouse at TEDxCollegeofWilliam&Mary [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c0bEZS1jC4

Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority. (n.d.). English, Curriculum.
https://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/english/english/curriculum/f-10

Topic: Reading for pleasure and exposing students to interactive digital stories.

Platform or tool: Book Creator

Rationale:

In my current school most students are familiar with reading digital stories through the apps Reading Eggs and Epic! which include some media aspects like audio narration however, they lack interactivity that allows the reader any control over the direction of the story. I often witness students repeatedly tapping their iPads to turn the page without reading the story. For this digital storytelling project I have chosen to retell the fairy tale Little Red Riding Hood in the hope that by creating an interactive ‘choose your own adventure’ type story, students in years 1 and 2 will be more interested and engaged to read the text rather than just progressing through to the end. To help maintain the interests of the students, I plan to include at least two possible endings to the story.

I am using Book Creator because it has the required functionality of hyperlinking between different pages within the book and the ability to insert media. According to Campbell and Narayan (2017) Book Creator has its own platform that books can be published to, allowing readers to access the book without having to log in or be limited to viewing it in a PDF or video capacity. It also includes a ‘read to me’ option where the words are highlighted as the computer reads the book to the user, which Dobler (2013) suggests assists students to visually track text. I will also be using websites such as Flikr and Canva to help create the content of my story for a more pleasurable interactive reading experience.

References

Dobler, E. (2013). Looking beyond the screen: Evaluating the quality of digital books. Reading Today, 30(5), 20-21.

Campbell, M. & Narayan, S. (2017, July 26). How we created an interactive choose your own adventure book. The Book Creator Blog. https://bookcreator.com/2017/07/created-interactive-choose-adventure-book/

The variety of digital literature currently available creates opportunities for students to explore different formats of narrative and access tools to support their reading endeavours. Enhanced e-books with audio narration options are, in particular, of value to beginning readers (Dobler, 2013). As a practising teacher, I have been using digital texts for their technology aspects with little awareness of their actual quality. Through my exploration of digital texts in this subject I have developed a greater awareness of how digital elements enhance or detract from a text and now know that some digital elements can distract the reader and disrupt the immersive reading experience (Dobler, 2013; James & De Kock, 2013).

Digital literature is ever evolving as are the platforms they reside on, the technologies they use and reliability of accessibility. For example, as part of my research on digital literature I found many dead links and apps that no longer exist. The evolving world of technology means that the presence of digital literature in its current published form is often temporary and unreliable. Any change to the platform that hosts the piece of digital literature can affect the functionality of the work (Bootzs, 2014).  Despite this ephemeral nature there seems to be more digital literature available across multiple platforms than ever before.

Of the types of electronic reading environments mentioned by Lamb (2011); e-books, interactive storybooks, reference databases, hypertext and interactive fiction, and transmedia storytelling I have the most practical experience using enhanced e-books and interactive storybooks. I regularly use these types of digital literature as I have found them to be especially suited to young readers because they contain tools like audio narration to demonstrate fluent reading, and text highlighting to assist students with tracking the text with their eyes rather than their finger (Dobler, 2013).

Using digital literature in the classroom can seem daunting as it is exciting, challenging and in a state of perpetual change (Allan, 2017) and though there is a much needed space for it in the curriculum, it is my view that it will never fully replace print versions. Quality digital literature is first and foremost quality literature. Before evaluating the digital elements of a text, it is important to determine if the story itself is well told and appropriate for its intended audience (Walsh, 2013; Yakota & Teale, 2014).

Some texts are more suited to print due to their intended purpose. For example, some picture books are of a larger size to demonstrate the full value of their illustrations. These types of texts would not transfer well to a digital medium (Yakota, 2015). This also works in the converse where some texts, that were born digital, have unique digital elements that would not be possible to realise in a print version.

In today’s environment, students have grown up using digital technology as part of their everyday play and learning, meaning that they are more inclined to choose a story based on interest rather than format (Kucirkova, 2018).

Of the three digital texts I reviewed, I found the most appropriate to incorporate into my current teaching of Year One students was Don’t Let Pigeon Run This App! This narrative app would be excellent to use in a unit of work investigating texts from the author Mo Willems as well as being a strong foundation for students when innovating on the text. Innovating on a familiar text is an age appropriate way for young writers to learn about crafting a story in a supported manner (Griffith & Ruan, 2008).

The unit of work would include the use of the app and the print iterations of the series with the same character, the Pigeon, as the basis of the comparison. Students could also be guided to compare the app and the print versions of the Pigeon stories, identifying similarities and differences and justifying their own preference. Students would create short narrative texts that build on their knowledge of a familiar character which are key elements in the writing section of the Victorian Curriculum (VCELY194 and VCELT193).

I believe, it is imperative that teachers are incorporating different types of digital literature into their teaching and learning programs. If students are engaging with digital literature outside the classroom then, as teachers, we have an obligation to teach it within the classroom environment (Kitson, 2017). While students may be ‘using’ digital literature, they need to be taught how to navigate and interpret it just as they need instruction on using and interpreting print literature. Fuhler (2010) found that technology use, guided by informed teachers, increased student motivation in the use of technology for learning. It is also difficult for students to turn their knowledge of informally using technology to more explicit learning contexts without teacher intervention (Walker et al., 2010). The teacher’s role is critical to supporting students in navigating and evaluating the best literary medium, digital or print, for their specific students and learning outcomes.

 

References

Allen, C. (2017). Digital fiction: ‘Unruly object’ or literary artefact? English in Australia, 52(2), 21-27

Bootzs, P. (2014). Digital literature: Ephemeral in truth? Hybrid, 1. (N. Cognard, Trans.). https://doi.org/10.4000/hybrid.1162

Dobler, E. (2013). Looking beyond the screen: Evaluating the quality of digital books. Reading Today, 30(5), 20-21.

Fuhler, C. J. (2010). Using primary source documents and digital storytelling as a catalyst for writing historical fiction in the fourth grade. In B. Moss & D. Lapp (Eds.), Teaching new literacies in grades 4-6: Resources for 21^st-century classrooms (pp. 136-150). Guilford Press.

Griffith, P. & Ruan, J. (2008). Story innovation: An instructional strategy for developing vocabulary and fluency. The Reading Teacher, 61(4), 334-358. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20204592

James, R. & De Kock, L. (2013). The digital David and the Gutenberg Goliath: the rise of the ‘enhanced’ e-book. English Academy Review, 30(1), 107-123. https://doi.org/10.1080/10131752.2013.783394

Kitson, L. (2017). Exploring opportunities literary literacy with e-literature: To infinity and beyond. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 25(2), 58-68.

Kucirkova, N. (2018). How and why to create and read children’s digital books: A guide for primary practitioners. UCL Press.

Lamb, A. (2011). Reading redefined for a transmedia universe. Learning and Leading with Technology, 39(3), 12-17.

Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority. (n.d.). Victorian curriculum: Foundation-10. https://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/

Walker, S., Jameson, J., & Ryan, M. (2010). Skills and strategies for e-learning in a participatory culture. In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham, & S. Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 212-224). Routledge.

Walsh, M. (2013). Literature in a digital environment. In L. McDonald (Ed.), A literature companion for teachers. Primary English Teaching Association PEETA.

Yakota, J. (2015). The past, present and future of digital picturebooks for children. In M. Manrisa & N. Real (Eds.), Digital literature for children: Texts, readers and educational practices. (pp. 73-86). P.I.E. Peter Lang.

Yokota, J. & Teale, W. H. (2014). Picture books and the digital world: educators making informed choices. The Reading Teacher, 34(6).

Introduction

At Nightfall, the Goldfish by Melody Mou is a hypertext fictional story (Lamb, 2011) accessible via internet browsers. Using hyperlinks, the non-linear story contains short points of view about five interrelated characters whose connection to each other can be interpreted in a multitude of ways. Mou is a new media artist who has created a story that uses a combination of narrative techniques which are maze like, circular and leap in perspective (Mou, 2021).

Criteria 1: Is the story well told?

This non-linear narrative can be experienced in order of the reader’s choosing and areas of interest and genuine curiosity about life. Each section is short and pertinent to the story enabling the reader to comprehend concepts within the context of the story’s themes and symbols of life and death that touch on the idea of reincarnation. The depth of meaning attributed to the story telling is left to the reader and the depth of their interpretations. The ability to create meaning that shows the human experience is a key aspect to determining a narrative’s quality (Walsh, 2013).

Criteria 2: Are the language and illustrations appropriate for the intended audience?

The intended audience is the adult reader who is seeking an experience in the journey of life where they can determine the order in which they read the story dependent on their interests and direction the story is taking. As a piece of digital literature, the language used is clearly aimed at an adult audience able to see beyond the surface and understand the deeper themes and meanings it holds.

While the text has no illustrations, the background of the text is a plugin that simulates the soothing effects of water and is reflective of the organic nature of life. As the curser moves across the screen it creates ripples in the water like the high and lows of ones lifelong journey. The arrangement of the character hyperlinks creates a circular image using words from each chapter. Words from the central character of Goldfish spread out like a cross visually connecting all parts of the circle together.

Language is used creatively and each individual chapter is set out more like poetry than a traditional narrative. Appropriate to the audience, it plays with language in a way that requires interpretation from the reader as well as giving the reader access to the inner lives of the characters, which Susan Conley in her TEDx talk (2012) deems as being a powerful element to any story.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Criteria 3: Do the digital aspects of the text enhance the story?

At Nightfall, the Goldfish utilises a combination of text placement, hyperlinks and a plugin to create an atmospheric text. There are a number of interactive elements that add to the ambience but that don’t change the outcome of the story. The water like plugin that creates ripples as the curser moves across the screen is enchanting and does not distract from reading the passages of text.

The use of hyperlinks allows the reader to choose the order in which they read the characters’ points of view. After clicking on a character the reader is offered no navigation options until they have revealed all of the sentences for that point of view by scrolling across the scattered words on the screen. Only then is the option to continue provided. The limited amount of hyperlinks helps the reader stay engaged in an immersive experience (James & De Kock, 2013).

Dobler (2013) suggests that the digital elements should add to the reader’s understanding of the text and that is true with At Nightfall, the Goldfish. The digital elements add to the atmosphere and clearly show the connections between each character and their point of view. The arrangement of text and the visual elements (while not images) add another layer of meaning to the text and are a part of the culture of digital literature (Rajathi & Kalamani, 2020).

The recent publication date of this text speaks to the ever evolving trend of finding new and innovative ways for people to express themselves at a deeper and more relevant way. A digital medium provides another platform for artists and authors to showcase and promote their work in new ways to a larger audience (Rajathi & Kalamani, 2020).

Conclusion

At Nightfall, the Goldfish is a unique non-linear narrative that uses its digital elements to create a thoughtful narrative experience (McGeehan et al., 2018) for the adult reader. Its key strengths are the way the author connects each character both visually and within the narrative as well as the ambience of life afforded by its watery, rippled background. The text, while possible to read in a printed physical form would lose much of its meaning and clear interconnectedness that makes it such an engaging experience.

 

References

Dobler, E. (2013). Looking beyond the screen: Evaluating the quality of digital books. Reading Today, 30(5), 20-21.

James, R. & De Kock, L. (2013). The digital David and the Gutenberg Goliath: the rise of the ‘enhanced’ e-book. English Academy Review, 30(1), 107-123. https://doi.org/10.1080/10131752.2013.783394

Lamb, A. (2011). Reading redefined for a transmedia universe. Learning and Leading with Technology, 39(3), 12-17.

McGeehan, C., Chambers, S. & Nowakowski, J. (2018). Just because it’s digital, doesn’t mean it’s good: Evaluating digital picture books. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 34(2), 58-70.

Mou, M. (2021). At Nightfall, the Goldfish. https://melodyneedsmoney.github.io/AtNightfalltheGoldfish/Intro

Rajathi, R. & Kalamani, S. (2020). Digital literature: A literary trend of the twenty first century. International Journal of Advanced Research (IJAR), 8(11), 725-728. http://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/12062

TEDx Talks. (2012, June 29). The power of story: Susan Conley at TEDxDirigo [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkqb6uDRNQs

Walsh, M. (2013). Literature in a digital environment. In L. McDonald (Ed.), A literature companion for teachers. Primary English Teaching Association PEETA.

Introduction

Don’t Let Pigeon Run This App! is produced by Disney and can be downloaded from the Apple app store for a cost. As a piece of digital literature it is hard to place into any of the categories proposed by Lamb (2011). It is not exactly an enhanced e-book or an interactive story book as the text of the story is not always displayed on screen. It also isn’t interactive fiction as the stories presented are linear in nature. The best description for this digital text is a ‘narrative app’ that tells a story in an ordered and linear series of connected events. The events incorporate interactive features that don’t change the outcome of the story, as suggested by Turrion Penelas (2015).

This narrative app will be evaluated using a simplified criteria based on the work of Yakota and Teale (2014) and Walsh (2013).

Criteria 1: Is the story well told?

The app has a number of linear stories that follow the same format as the print version where the reader is trying to be persuaded by the character Pigeon to let him do something that he is not allowed to do. While similar, the stories differ based on the user’s interactions with the text. However, no matter what choices the reader takes, the outcome of the story is always the same. The concept of the reader being guided to make their own stories means they are invested in the story and enables the story to be told in a way that is appropriate to the readers’ level of comprehension. The reader is prompted by Pidgeon to feel empathy for the main character by Pidgeon addressing them directly and seeking their ideas. Walsh (2013) suggest being able to elicit empathy from the reader as an indicator of quality literature.

Criteria 2: Are the language and illustrations appropriate for the intended audience?

The intended audience is the beginner reader. The illustrations and animated style of the characters are appropriate for this age group and transfer well to iPad dimensions which Yokota and Teale (2014) suggest is important for digital literature. Illustrations, which are an integral part of children’s print literature, also play a key role in the success of this narrative app.

The language used throughout the story is fun, engaging and appropriate for beginner readers including  non-readers, as the majority of the story is verbally narrated by Pigeon. Children can be as ‘silly’ as they like in responding to Pigeons request for ideas and are entertained by the text as the character speaks directly to them with Pigeon having many amusing ways to try to persuade the reader of his good intentions. The language in the text becomes even more accessible to students through the ability to partially co-author the story and hear their own voice in the app which can be an engaging feature (Kucirkova, 2018). One of the key features of the app is that there is a new experience for the reader every time they revisit the app and respond the Pigeons questions.

Criteria 3: Do the digital aspects of the text enhance the story?

This digital iteration of Pigeon combines the best aspects of the print book with interactive elements that allow the reader to respond to Pigeons questions in fun ways that allows their own creative input to the flow of the story but not the outcome. This interaction enhances the story as the reader feels involved and part of the story in helping Pigeon.

Turrion Penelas (2015) suggests that the best currently available digital literature for children are ones where the interactive elements are embedded into the story. The digital elements in the Don’t Let Pigeon Run This App! meet this criteria to the benefit of the reader’s experience. Rather than moving through pages of text, the reader’s responses play out on the screen more like a movie or television show. This avoids children reading the story backwards or in a non-linear fashion that Lamb (2011) suggests affects comprehension of the story.

A key digital element that supports the enquiring mind of young readers is the ability of the app to be reused to create a different journey (Bozkurt & Bozkaya, 2015). This app builds on reusability by creating a slightly different story each time it is used meaning the reader will be more likely to return again and again.

Conclusion

Don’t Let Pigeon Run This App! is a well-produced narrative app that contains the appeal of a familiar character from its print iterations and the ability for users to affect the storyline. The app engages children with its ability to be familiar, fun and ‘silly’ each time it is used. It is also a great way to encourage children to write their own stories through Pigeon’s guidance as the main character.

References

Bozkurt, A. & Bozkaya, M. (2015). Evaluation criteria for interactive e-books for open and distance learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(5), 58-82. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1077792.pdf

Disney Publishing Worldwide Applications. (2017). Don’t let Pigeon run this app! (Version 1.3) [Mobile app.]. Apple App Store. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/dont-let-pigeon-run-this-app/id459749670

Kucirkova, N. (2018). How and why to create and read children’s digital books: A guide for primary practitioners. UCL Press.

Lamb, A. (2011). Reading redefined for a transmedia universe. Learning and Leading with Technology, 39(3), 12-17.

Turrion Penelas, C. (2015). Electronic literature for children: Characterising narrative apps (2010-2014). In M. Manrisa & N. Real (Eds.), Digital Literature for Children: Texts, Readers and Educational Practices. (pp. 87-102). P.I.E. Peter Lang.

Walsh, M. (2013). Literature in a digital environment. In L. McDonald (Ed.),  A literature companion for teachers. Primary English Teaching Association PEETA.

Yokota, J. & Teale, W. H. (2014). Picture books and the digital world: educators making informed choices. The Reading Teacher, 34(6).

Introduction

Mr. Ball Makes a To-Do List by Michael Townsend is an enhanced e-book in the form of a comic. An e-book is a book in electronic form that can be read on a computer or electronic device rather than print. According to Lamb (2011) enhanced e-books contain extra features such as, audio, images and other media. Mr. Ball Makes a To-Do List has audio, or ‘read to me’ capabilities, along with highlighted text and the ability to click on words to hear pronunciations and see definitions. It fits into Lamb’s (2011) definition of an enhanced e-book and will be evaluated using criteria based on the work of Yakota and Teale (2014) and Walsh (2013).

Criteria 1: Is the story well told?

The main character in the story is Mr. Ball, who loves to make to-do lists but has trouble ticking off all of the items on his list. It is a fun story, full of energy that uses simple vocabulary and frequently used words suitable for beginning readers. The story is in comic book format that fits the trend of publishing graphic novels online (Moorefield-Lang & Gavigan, 2012), allowing a larger audience to access this text. The comic book format helps the author tell the story in a quite direct wat that engages children. It is well told in a logical and sequential manner suitable for its intended audience. The Goodreads (2022) reviews gave the print version of this text an average of 3.76 out of 5 stars, indicating that readers enjoy the story. This text was originally published in print and has been adapted into a digital version for the educational reading app epic!

Criteria 2: Are the language and illustrations appropriate for the intended audience?

One of the main strengths of the book is that it fulfils its purpose of engaging young beginning readers, the intended audience, through a chapter book format with vibrant illustrations and a story that children find relatable and funny. The illustrations are clear and help tell the story while the comic panels are set out in a logical manner that is easy to follow, with some guidance from the author about where to start reading.

The language used is appropriate for beginning readers and is very similar to Green Eggs and Ham by Dr. Seuss which used only 50 different words (Higley, 2021). The concept of using few words frequently helps beginning readers to recognise words and sounds the character is making.

Criteria 3: Do the digital aspects of the text enhance the story?

The main digital feature of the text is the optional audio narration and highlighting of words which helps children follow along with the story and provides a good example of fluent and expressive reading. The beginning reader is able to follow the comic format and the order in which the panels are read. The reader can pause the narration and read the text themselves which helps to differentiate the use of this text for readers. Readers may prefer to hear the words read to them (Lamb, 2011) while more confident readers are able to read the text independently. It also allows students to practise reading on their own with a built in support that is otherwise not possible without an adult presence (Roskos et al., 2014).

Overall the digital features enhance the story however there are some disadvantage with the technical design which distract from the overall experience. For example;  the accuracy and functionality of the clickable sections is not always reliable, pronunciation of words is not always correct i.e.: ‘loves’ converts to ‘love’ and the definitions provided in the written text are not at a level that will assist the audience the book is aimed at.

While the digital elements do not always enhance the story as other enhanced e-books might, the elements used are appropriate for younger readers to use more independently than they would be able to with the print version. There are minimal distractions of extra content that animations and inbuilt games may cause (Dobler, 2013). The focus is on the reading of the text with additional audio support.

Conclusion

Mr. Ball Makes a To-Do List by Michael Townsend is a well-designed enhanced e-book for beginning readers. It is visually enticing and is supported with audio for readers to follow along. The digital elements of the book increase the accessibility for its target audience and aid in supporting early reading abilities. Accessibility to this e-book is another advantage in that it is hosted on the app epic! which has free content for educators and students who sign-up. This app can be accessed on any type of tablet and even has an internet browser version that can be used on desktops and laptops making Mr. Ball Makes a To-Do List able to be enjoyed many times over by the beginner reader from school or home.

 

References

Dobler, E. (2013). Looking beyond the screen: Evaluating the quality of digital books. Reading Today, 30(5), 20-21.

Goodreads, Inc. (2022). Mr. Ball Makes a To-Do List. Goodreads. Retrieved August 15, 2022 from https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/18007640

Higley, D. (2021). The stories behind the stories. Bushel & Peck Books.

Lamb, A. (2011). Reading redefined for a transmedia universe. Learning and Leading with Technology, 39(3), 12-17.

Moorefield-Lang, H. & Gavigan, K. (2012). These aren’t your father’s: the new world of digital graphic novels. Knowledge Quest, 40(3), 30-35.

Roskos, K., Burstein, K., Yi Shang, & Gray, E. (2014). Young children’s engagement with e-books at school: Does device matter? SAGE Open, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013517244

Townsend, M. (2014). Mr. Ball Makes a To-Do List. Blue Apple Books.

Walsh, M. (2013). Literature in a digital environment. In L. McDonald (Ed.), A literature companion for teachers. Primary English Teaching Association PEETA.

Yokota, J. & Teale, W. H. (2014). Picture books and the digital world: educators making informed choices. The Reading Teacher, 34(6).

In my teaching I use a combination of print and digital texts as part of my learning activities. This includes for example, the use of texts within the Reading Eggs program, the app Epic! and video based literature such as Book Box Library. In particular, the app version of ‘The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore’ by William Joyce stands out, in my mind, as a complementary adaption of the print version to digital. In discussions with other teachers I found they also felt that the adaption was engaging for their students and one where the digital elements not only supported the story but enhanced the learning experience for the students. This insight was a surprise to me as I had never connected the quality of the digital components of online literature beyond the fact that it was useful for certain teaching and learning intentions. The realisation that the digital components might distract from the story as Dobler (2013) suggests is something that will be beneficial in my teaching practice when evaluating the relevance of the complementary nature of digital and printed text to support student learning outcomes. This is not a solitary opinion. McGeehan, Chambers and Nowakowski (2018) also believe that the digital elements of digital literature need to support the reader’s literacy experience. From a professional development perspective, the readings in module 1 of ETL533 have me questioning the types of digital texts I should be choosing to better support my developing readers who might require increased guidance and context.

Quality digital elements are important, but in reality, what does this mean? Lamb (2011) identifies five types of digital literature; eBooks, enhanced eBooks, interactive storybooks, reference databases, hypertexts and interactive fiction, and transmedia storytelling. Each of these types of digital texts have tools that aid the reader to have meaningful interactions with the text such as; highlighting, dictionaries for establishing meaning, embedded media and web links, audio, and words that are highlighted and fade as they are read (Lamb, 2011). The presence of such digital elements doesn’t necessarily relate to, or add to, the quality of the digital literature as Yokota and Teale’s (2014) evaluation of the app version of ‘The Tale of Peter Rabbit’ by Beatrix Potter found. Their review suggests that although the app had many good reviews it contained animation, in parts, that had little to do with enhancing the reader’s understanding or appreciation of the story (Yokota and Teale, 2014). While entertaining and engaging such animations have the potential to distract the student from the actual learning experience.

My readings have shown that when digital elements are included in a text in a considered way with clear purpose then the quality of the learning outcome is enhanced. However, with the increased proliferation of digital texts and ability for anyone to publish their own digital text without the evaluation processes (Walsh, 2013) that publishers, editors and professional reviewers undertake for printed text, means that educators and teachers, like myself, need to be more aware and critical about what constitutes quality digital literature and evaluate the appropriateness of such texts. This needs to be combined with passing on such skills to students so they can make informed choices about their own digital text selections as they journey through their educational studies.

References

Dobler, E. (2013). Looking beyond the screen: Evaluating the quality of digital books. Reading Today, 30(5), 20-21. https://web-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=1b2a8f5e-8ca0-46aa-b202-52209b34b771%40redis

Lamb, A. (2011). Reading redefined for a transmedia universe. Learning and Leading with Technology, 39(3), 12-17. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=67371172&site=ehost-live

McGeehan, C., Chambers, S., & Nowakowski, J. (2018). Just because it’s digital, doesn’t mean it’s good: Evaluating digital picture books. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 34(2), 58-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2017.1399488

Walsh, M. (2013). Literature in a digital environment (Ch. 13). In L. McDonald (Ed.), A literature companion for teachers. Marrickville, NSW: Primary English Teaching Association Australia (PETAA).

Yokota, J. & Teale, W. H. (2014). Picture books and the digital world: Educators making informed choices. The Reading Teacher, 34(6). https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1262