Evaluation of the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen

(1)

Evaluation of the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen – M.D. Otten

1 Educational Science and Technology

Master thesis

Evaluation of the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen

Maaike Otten 20-9-2015

(2)

2 Title of final project

Evaluation of the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen Author

Maaike Otten, m.d.otten@student.utwente.nl Educational Institute

University of Twente Faculty

Behavioural Science Educational program

Master Educational Science and Technology Graduation committee

Dr. E.J. Van Rossum, e.j.vanrossum@gw.utwente.nl Prof. dr. ir. B.P. Veldkamp, b.p.veldkamp@utwente.nl

Name of external organization

ProfAct V.O.F. (contacts Rick Pleijhuis & Kasper Veldhuis)

(3)

3

Acknowledgement

Hereby I present my master thesis for the study Educational Science and Technology (EST) at the University of Twente. In this foreword, I would like to thank a lot of people who have supported and helped me throughout my final project.

First of all, I would like to thank my supervisors Erik Jan van Rossum and Bernard Veldkamp for their feedback and advice from their own field of expertise which helped me to improve my final project. I would like to say that I enjoyed the meetings. I appreciate the critical views on conducting research and (the theme of) my final project, which helped me to gain insights of another point of view.

Furthermore, I would also like to thank ProfAct Academy team. I am glad that I got in touch with Rick Pleijhuis and Kasper Veldhuis, the owners of ProfAct, and thankful that I could do my final project for their consultancy firm. Besides that, I liked that I could also offer ProfAct an advice report.

The evaluation of the workshop Effectief studeren and online course Snellezen Brons made me enthusiastic to work for and jump out of my bed to start the day. I appreciate the collaboration and the adjustments they made to make it possible to do my research, such as sending the questionnaires to the participants.

Moreover, I would like to thank the respondents to participate in this research; without them, there would not be data to analyse. I would especially like to thank, Maaike Sikkink, as participant but also as coordinator. She helped me to arrange a workshop Effectief studeren at her study program and get in touch with the right people with her enthusiasm.

Last, but definitely not least, I would like to express gratitude to all my family and friends that supported me during my final project. Several friends and family also were participants in my research, pre-tested my instruments or helped me to find other participants. Besides that, I would like to thank Grietha de Jonge for being my inter-rater for the qualitative data. Furthermore, Randy Möwes and Evelien Dam need to receive special attention as they offered valuable feedback to improve my thesis. Moreover, I would like to express gratitude for my parents because they listened, read and helped me with my thesis and more importantly offered their support and love.

Maaike Otten September 2015

(4)

4

Summary

Effective study skills, which are tools or tactics for student’s learning, are fundamental to academic achievement (Gettinger & Seibert, 2002). Low academic achieving students often show ineffective study skills. One of the reasons students drop out of university is because secondary school did not prepare them with study- and timemanagement skills (Rausch & Hamilton, 2006). Students need to

“learn to learn” (Bermingham & Mahdi, 2005). Reading is an important part of studying, yet slow reading is a widely recognised problem for students (Bell, 2001). To support them, consultancy ProfAct developed the workshop Effectief studeren [effective study techniques] and the online course Snellezen Brons [speed reading Bronze].

The aim of this research is to analyse the following question: “What are the effects of the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen Brons on the participants?”. The research focused on the cognitive and affective effects of studying and speed reading after attending the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen. A quasi-experimental design that used mixed-methods (namely observation, questionnaires, interviews, memory test and reading tests) studied participants of the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen.

Positive effects with regard to the workshop Effectief studeren were amongst others, increased reading speed, and changes in participants’ intentions and behaviour (e.g. tidy learning environment) and motivation to study more diligently. Reasons why the workshop did not have an effect is because participants were already acquainted with the study techniques, satisfied with their study behaviour, or did not know how to apply techniques. The reading tests pointed out that the online course Snellezen increased the reading speed while retaining comprehension, however on average participants did not reach reading the aimed 500 words per minute. Qualitative data revealed that several participants had a decreased comprehension while reading at a speed reading rate in the workshop Effectief studeren as well as the online course Snellezen. Some participants of the online course Snellezen said that they reduced their reading speed in order to understand the text because they otherwise would overlook words at a speedier reading rate. Participants sought an optimal balance between reading speed and comprehension. A lot of participants kept using the speed reading techniques after the online course even though it differed on which texts they applied them to. Directly after the online course Snellezen several participants mentioned that they need to practice the speed reading techniques more in order to grasp the technique fully. Other positive effects of the online course Snellezen was that it increased concentration, prevented backskipping and was used as a tool in order to find valuable information in a text quickly.

The conducted research was aimed to do as optimal as possible within the given boundaries.

However, the research had some limitations, such as participants had to remember words for a longer period of time at the post-test. Therefore suggestions for improvement were included. A recommendation for future research was to use different types of reading material (paper vs.

(digital) screen) so that the effects of the different modalities could be measured. Also, giving clear instructions in order to minimize distractions whilst speed reading was advised. Furthermore, it was recommended to measure also comprehension of the participants who attend the workshop Effectief studeren. Besides that, a control group could be added in order to deal with internal validity threat. Furthermore, the other online speed reading courses of ProfAct that takes more weeks could be researched in order to see whether a prolonged time of the course increases participants’ speed reading skills.

Keywords:

Evaluation, effectiveness, effective study techniques, speed reading

(5)

5

Introduction

Problem statement

Effective study skills are very important in education because study skills are fundamental to academic achievement (Gettinger & Seibert, 2002; Markel, Woolfolk & Inglehart, 2008; Thorpe, 2010). Study skills are critical tools and/or tactics for students’ learning which consist of a range of coordinated cognitive skills and processes that increase the effectiveness and efficiency of learning (Gettinger & Seibert, 2002). A wide range of study strategies and knowledge about where, how and when to use them are necessary for students to be effective learners. Good students are active learners who are directors of their own learning instead of passive recipients of information because that is the essence of effective studying (Gettinger & Seibert, 2002). However, not all students are effective learners to a degree that capable students may face difficulties in school because they lack good study skills (Gettinger & Seibert, 2002). Low academic achieving students often show ineffective study skills. Those students have a more restricted set of study skills, have difficulties adapting their study skills to the task at hand and rely on others for their learning (Gettinger &

Seibert, 2002). One of the reasons for students to drop out of university is the fact that secondary schools did not prepare them sufficiently in study and time-management skills needed to work at a university level (Bermingham & Mahdi, 2005; Coughlan & Swift, 2011; Rausch & Hamilton, 2006;

Turner & Thompson, 2014). Another reason mentioned by Rausch and Hamilton (2006) was that classes were deemed as too easy. Thus students need to “learn to learn” to become self-directed

learners (Bermingham & Mahdi, 2005).

One ability which is especially important for university students is to be able to read effeciently as they have to read large amounts of texts in a short period of time. Therefore, students should be provided with the skills to deal with the rapidly growing amount of written material (Alarfaj & Alshumaimeri, 2012). Moreover, slow reading is a widely recognised problem as processing information to slowly will inhibit the brain to store enough information in the short-term memory in order to decode the overall message (Bell, 2001). Reading fluently, which encompasses reading speed, is crucial for successful comprehension (Macalister, 2010).

Fortunately, study skills and speed reading can be taught (Gettinger & Seibert, 2002; Yen, 2012). Explicit study skill instruction teaches students to study more effectively and efficiently (Gettinger & Seibert, 2002). Students become more thoughtful and independent learners with higher academic achievement (Gettinger & Seibert, 2002). Additionally, they acquire strategic knowledge and use new study strategies they would not have developed without training. Students who possess effective study skills are less likely to be frustrated and more likely to have a positive sense of control over their learning which in turn motivates them to study diligently and in a more efficient and effective manner (Markel et. al., 2008). Study skills courses increase the likelihood of student retention, satisfaction and success at university (Coughlan & Swift, 2011).

Furthermore, speed reading courses increase the reading speed both during as well as outside the training (Macallister, 2010; Yen, 2012), while comprehension remains the same (Yen, 2012). Additionally, the speed of comprehension can be increased as the reader can extract the meaning from texts more accurately (Alarfaj & Alshumaimeri, 2012). Furthermore, speed reading saves time and higher efficiency can be achieved (Garaibah, 2003, as cited by Alarfaj & Alshumaimeri, 2012).

To support the students in developing effective study skills and improve reading, the consultancy firm ProfAct developed the workshop Effectief studeren and the online workshop Snellezen. ProfAct would like to evaluate the current workshop Effectief studeren and online course Snellezen in order to demonstrate their value. Therefore, the goal of this research was to examine what the effects of the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen are on the participants.

(8)

8

Theoretical conceptual framework

Effective studying

Studying is skilful, intentional, highly personal, individualized and self-regulated (Gettinger & Seibert, 2002). Study skills involve acquiring, recording, organizing, synthesizing, remembering and using information and ideas (Thorpe, 2010). Closely connected to study skill are study strategies, as study strategies are the processes of selecting and organizing the skills of the learner (Motevalli, Roslan, Sulaiman, Hamzah, Hassan & Garmjani, 2013). They can be distinguished into four categories: 1) repetition- or rehearsal-based study strategies, 2) procedural or organization-based strategies, 3) cognitive-based strategies, and 4) metacognitive-based strategies (Gettinger & Seibert, 2002).

Another categorization is Bloom’s taxonomy that distinguishes three educational domains, namely cognitive, affective and motor-skills domain (Reeves, 1990). This taxonomy helps to define teaching goals and choosing evaluation techniques. The cognitive domain focuses on intellectual abilities and skills. For instance, Gettinger and Seibert’s study skills strategies belong in the cognitive domain. The affective domain involves students’ internalized interests, attitudes, values,

appreciations and behaviour, whereas motor-skills domain include physical activity. Bloom’s

taxonomy helps also to focus attention on domains such as motor-skills which are ignored largely by secondary schools and colleges (Reeves, 1990).

Effective study skills interventions focus on offering strategies and/or help to develop study-, learning, or other (transferable) skills to students that help them improve their academic skills (Markel et. al., 2008). There are numerous techniques possible such as special modules integrated in the course curriculum, optional extracurricular classes (Markel et al., 2008) or the provision of materials such as in a web-based system (Bermingham & Mahdi, 2005). Interventions can focus on time management, organization, concentration, memorization, test-taking and enhancing reading and summarizing skills (Markel et. al., 2008; Motevalli et. al., 2013).

Several kind of methods are used to evaluate effective studying interventions (Bermingham

& Mahdi, 2005; Coughlan & Swift, 2011; Fergy, Heatley, Morgan & Hodgson, 2008; Markel et. al., 2008). The effectiveness of study skills interventions can be measured using surveys for students and academic staff (Bermingham & Mahdi, 2005; Coughlan & Swift, 2011). Fergy, Heatley, Morgan and Hodgson (2008) used focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews. More quantitative research can also be conducted, such as using standardized tests that measure reading vocabulary, comprehension and rate, as well as a wide range of achievement and subject-specific tests (Markel et. al., 2008). Several researchers also use grade point averages or students’ course averages to measure academic achievement (Onwuegbuzie et al., 2001; Tuckman, 2003).

Speed reading

Reading can be described as “the acquisition of meaning from text in a sentence-by-sentence manner” (Carver, 1985, as cited by Vernon, 2009, p. 142). Speed reading aims to enhance reading speed while maintaining a consistent level of comprehension (Vernon, 2009). It has often been defined by the number of words read during the process of reading in a specific period of time (Alhajaj, 2006, as cited by Alarfaj & Alshumaimeri, 2012). An average college student would read at a rate of approximately 300 words per minute (Vernon, 2009). However, the reading speed will be considerably lower when unfamiliar elements are present in texts or the reading purpose is different than general comprehension (Macalister, 2010). Influencing factors on the reading speed are age of the reader (younger participants benefit more from speed reading programs) and text complexity (Vernon, 2009). Alarfaj and Alshumaimeri (2012) also suggest other factors that could influence the reading speed such as reading purpose, intelligence, poor vision and linguistics background.

Voronchuck and Lando (2013) also add attention span and previous reading experience as factors influencing readers speed.

A point frequently discussed topic in research concerning reading speed is the relationship between reading speed and comprehension (Alarfaj & Alshumaimeri, 2012). Some researchers found

(9)

9 that speed reading courses have significant impact at increasing reading speed at the expense of comprehension (Bell, 2001; Vernon, 2009). That has commonly led to the discussion of the speedaccuracy trade-off which states that the increase of reading speed lowers the accuracy of understanding a text ⁽Vernon, 2009). Proponents of the speedaccuracy trade-off believe that it is not possible for a reader to enhance the reading speed without overlooking information (Vernon, 2009).

Contrary, Alarfaj and Alshumaimeri (2012) concluded in their literature research that most researchers confirm a positive relationship between reading speed and comprehension. Ritter, Colson and Park (2013) explain that when the reading process becomes more automatic and fluent, the reader’s attention and other cognitive resources can be directed to comprehending the meaning of the text. Vernon (2009) concludes that a positive relationship between reading speed and comprehension exists up to a certain degree, after which reading speed comprehension deteriorates rapidly.

Speed reading techniques aim to enhance the reading speed while maintaining understanding (Vernon, 2009). Speed reading techniques focus on increasing the visionary range, the number of words that can be recognised , reducing the jumping back of the eyes and checking pauses (Alarfaj & Alsumaimeri, 2012) as well as encouraging visual reading (Vernon, 2009). They commonly make use of a pointer or visual guide, such as a pen or the reader’s finger (Vernon, 2009). A metronome beat can guide the movement of a visual guide (Ritter et al., 2013).

Means to calculate the reading rate are the one-minute reading probe, entire text method, three-minute probe and ten-second interval method (Yen, 2012). Those methods use different lengths of time to assess the reading speed which in turn influence the results of speed reading training studies (Vernon, 2009). The most popular methods for assessing the comprehension are true-false question, multiple choice questions, short answer questions, recall tests and participant self-reports (Yen, 2012). Thus a variety of methods are used to assess the level of participants’

reading comprehension by researchers, however the value of the results of some studies are questionable according to McNamara (2000) in Vernon (2009). The complexity of the question directly influence the level of perceived comprehension after the speed reading of a text. To be specific, more superficial text-based questions scored higher in comprehension than the more complex, conceptual-based questions. Eye tracking and fMRI scans are also used to study the phenomenon of speed reading (Miyata, Minagawa-Kawai, Watanabe, Sasaki, & Ueda, 2012;

Ferguson, Nielsen & Anderson, 2014). Studies that focus on students with reading difficulties also used some extra tests to measure decoding and fluency of reading (Horrowitz et al., 2014; Irausqin, Drent, & Verhoeven, 2005). For instance, students need to read as many words as possible correctly of a list of isolated words in columns in one minute (Irausqin et al., 2005).

Research question

In order to evaluate the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen Brons, the study aimed to answer the following primary research question:

“What are the effects of the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen Brons on the participants?”

Other secondary questions were taken into account:

1. What are the cognitive effects of the workshop Effectief studeren and online course Snellezen Brons on the participants?

2. What are the affective effects of the workshop Effectief studeren and online course Snellezen Brons on the participants?

Figure 1 shows the conceptual model that illustrates the research questions.

(10)

10 Figure 1. Schematic representation of the conceptual model

Scientific and practical relevance

For both science and ProfAct, it is interesting to examine if the workshop and online course really attain their goals, have personal impact and generate change. Besides that, ProfAct could use the gained insights from the research to better inform (potential) participants what outcomes to expect.

From a scientific point of view, it could be interesting to know if the evaluation methods are applicable in different situations (an online course Snellezen and “real life” workshop Effectief studeren). Furthermore, earlier research did study effective studying and speed reading interventions but did not use a broad range of quantitative and qualitative instruments. The combination of which in this study could generate new insights by linking qualitative and quantitative results. Furthermore, this research could contribute to the debate of the speedaccuracy trade-off.

Research design and methods

Research design

The purpose of this research was to discover what the effects of the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen are on the participants. The conducted research was applied in nature.

Interventions, the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen, were evaluated in a quasi-experimental way (Dooley, 2000). This kind of design fitted to the evaluative research questions because the effects on a natural group would be measured. The investigation was a summative evaluation as the interventions were assessed on whether their goals were met and what their effects were (Akker, Bannan, Kelly, Nieveen & Plomp, 2010).

Description of the interventions

The workshop Effectief studeren is developed for students at the beginning of their academic career in order for them to gain more from their studies in less time (ProfAct, personal communication, October 12, 2014). Literature also suggested that those students in particular face difficulties because secondary schools did not prepare them sufficiently in study and time-management skills

Effective studying

Reading

Cognitive effects (e.g.

comprehension)

Affective effects (e.g. attention)

Study skills (e.g.

timemanagement)

Cognitive effects (e.g. memory)

Affective effects (e.g. satisfaction)

(11)

11 needed to work at a university level (Bermingham & Mahdi, 2005; Coughlan & Swift, 2011; Rausch &

Hamilton, 2006; Turner & Thompson, 2014). The maximum group size is 30 students. The workshop takes approximately 2,5 hours.

The learning goals of the workshop Effectief studeren are;

1. To improve memory by remembering 30% more 2. To apply more effective time management strategies 3. To learn new annotation techniques, such as mindmaps

4. To double the reading speed (in combination with the online course) 5. To recognise procrastination

6. To set feasible goals and create an optimal learning environment

The online course Snellezen has been advertised in the workshop Effectief Studeren. One can only truly speed read effectively by training regularly over a prolonged period of time. For this reason the speed reading course takes two weeks to complete consisting of theory and corresponding exercises.

Every workday participants receive theory and exercises in their mailbox for that day. ProfAct offers three online courses that differ in duration. The online courses Snellezen Brons [bronze], Zilver [silver], Goud [gold] take 2, 4 and 6 weeks respectively. The online course Snellezen Brons, lasting two weeks, was evaluated as the drop-out rate will most likely be much lower as the duration of commitment needed from the participants is lower. Besides that, data collection would take less time and the bronze course could be offered for free.

The main goal of de the online course Snellezen Brons is to increase the reading speed up to at least 500 words per minute while retaining comprehension within 2 weeks. The secondary goals are;

1. To eliminate subvocalization (voice in your head during reading) 2. To learn meta conduction techniques (using a visual guide) 3. To increase the visual field (the number of words per eye fixation)

Besides that, participants have to create their own (smart)goal at the start of the online course Snellezen Brons.

Method

Mixed-methods were used to evaluate the workshop Effectief studeren and the online course Snellezen. The mixing purposes were triangulation and complementarity (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2009; Greene, Caracelli & Graham, 1989). Triangulation was used because the same phenomenon was studied with different methods to offset biases, such as measuring comprehension with a questionnaire and a test. Besides that, the different instruments sought elaboration and illustration of each other thus the study was complementary. The design of the mixed methods was partially mixed concurrent dominant status design because different types of instruments were used at the same moment but qualitative research was present in all phases of the study (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2009).

Procedure

The participants received an information brochure and an informed consent form before they could participate in the research. Participants of the workshop Effectief studeren also had an oral explanation of the procedure. First, the participants of the workshop Effectief studeren received a memory test and a questionnaire in which they had to share their current study behaviour before the workshop. During the workshop Effectief Studeren, participants and the workshop trainers were observed with an observation scheme. Directly after the workshop, participants had to do another memory test and filled in a questionnaire about their intended study behaviour to measure short-

(12)

12 term effects. A sample of them were also be interviewed in a focus group. The workshop trainers were asked to leave the room during the pre- and post-test to prevent socially desirable answers.

Participants of the online course Snellezen received a reading comprehension test instead of a memory test and were not observed due to the fact that it was an online speed reading course. A month after the workshop and online course, all participants received a personalized mail with the last questionnaire about their behaviour at that time to measure long-term effects. If the participant did not fill in the questionnaire, they received a reminder one week later. After the participants filled in their last questionnaire, they received a debriefing mail and participants were asked if they were interested in the final results and wanted to have insight into their own data. Names of participants were not reported in order to protect anonymity.

Instruments

An overview of the instruments in each phase of the research is shown in figure 2. Each instrument will be discussed in more detail below and the entire instruments can be read in appendices A to E.

Figure 2. Overview instruments Memory test

The memory test measured learning goal 1(improve memory by remembering 30% more) of the workshop Effectief Studeren. Participants needed to remember 18 random words of everyday objects within one minute. Subsequently, they were asked to write down the words they remembered after ten minutes.

Questionnaire

The questionnaires consisted of open and closed questions with regard to the learning goals and expected effects, such as their planned study behaviour and elimination of subvocalization. An example question of post-test 1 of the online course Snellezen that measures a cognitive effect is “To what extend do you understand the texts when you read the text at your speed reading rate? Why do you do/do not?”. The pre-test questionnaire functioned as a baseline and additionally examined basic demographics such as gender, first language and age. The pre-test and post-test 1 of the workshop Effectief Studeren consisted of 19 questions and post-test 2 of 11 questions. The questionnaires of the online course Snellezen were respectively 6, 10 and 4 questions for the successive

questionnaires.

Pre-test Memory test Questionnaire Speed reading test

Workshop Effectief studeren Observation

Post-test 1 Memory test Questionnaire Focus group Speed reading test

Post-test 2 Questionnaire

Online course Snellezen Brons

Post-test 1 Speed and comprehension reading test Questionnaire

Post-test 2 Questionnaire Pre-test

Speed and comprehension reading test Questionnaire

(13)

13 Observation scheme

An observation took place to gain more insights regarding the effectiveness of the workshop and monitoring its direct effects concerning the participants. An observation scheme was constructed based on the observation scheme of SLO (2014) and Kijkwijzer voor taalgericht vakonderwijs (Taalgericht vakonderwijs, 2014). The observation scheme covered the topics general teaching practice, context and subject content, interaction and the behaviour of students. An example item of behaviour of the students is “Most students are actively engaged”.

Focus group

In order to receive answers to previously established questions, but also to be open for other possible relevant information, a semi-structured, in-depth interview was conducted. There was enough freedom to ask questions other than the predetermined questions if it was more convenient (Baarda, De Goede & Teunissen, 2009). The interview contained open and closed questions with regard to the different kind of effects. For example, an affective effect is measured with the question

“Which of the techniques learned are you going to apply to? Why so?”.

Reading test

The reading test aimed at measuring the main goal of the online course Snellezen Brons which is to increase reading speed to up to 500 words per minute while retaining comprehension. The state examination Dutch as a second language II 2002-2003 and 2009 was used as reading comprehension test (CvTE, 2015). This exam tests if someone mastered the Dutch language sufficiently for their job at higher education level. Thus an existing pre-tested instrument at the right comprehension level was used. An entire text-method was used because this allows for comprehension questions about the whole text to be asked. The computer could measure how much time was spent reading.

Subsequently, participants received questions to measure their comprehension. Participants of the online course Snellezen had to read two texts for each test in order for an adequate amount of questions to be asked. Due to time constraints in the workshop Effectief studeren, speed reading was measured by calculating the words per minute for reading a text for a duration of two minutes and asking for verbal feedback concerning the extent the participants understood the text. Aside from that there was no reading test at post-test 2 in order to keep the threshold to participate low.

Respondents

All the participants who decided to join the workshop Effectief studeren and online course Snellezen were asked to participate in this research. Stratified random sampling, based on gender and year of study, was only used for the focus group as only a few participants could be asked for the focus group. This sampling method was chosen because it generated a sample that represents the same distribution of people as in the targeted population (Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2007). For the workshop Effectief studeren, the target group were students who were interested to improve their study skill techniques with no regard to type of study. For the online course Snellezen, all people who were interested in increasing their reading speed and comprehension were included. The workshop Effectief Studeren had 17 respondents. All participants of the workshop Effectief studeren studied Chemical Engineering, their native language was Dutch and age varied from 18 till 23 years old.

Table 1 shows other demographic characteristics of the participants of the workshop Effectief Studeren, such as 76.5% of the respondents were male and 23.5% of the respondents had dyslexia.

(14)

14

Table 1

Demographic characters of the participants of the workshop Effectief Studeren

N [%]

Gender Man 13 (76.5)

Woman 4 (23.5)

Year of study 1e bachelor 5 (29.4)

2e bachelor 6 (35.3)

3^e bachelor 5 (29.4)

1^e master 1 (5.9)

2^e master 0 (0.0)

Dyslexia Yes 4 (23.5)

No 13 (76.5)

The speed reading course Snellezen Brons had 23 participants. However, in the data analysis of the SPSS data one participant was excluded because he was an outlier in the data. Table 2 shows the characteristics of the participants. Most participants were female, under the age of 25 years and auditory readers (group of readers who hear a voice in their head during reading). Only one person had dyslexia and one person whose native language was not Dutch.

Table 2

Demographic characters of the participants of the online course Snellezen

N [%]

Gender Man 6 (27.3)

Woman 16 (72.7)

Age < 25 years 11 (50.0)

25-35 years 5 (22.7)

35-45 years 1 (4.5)

45-55 years 4 (18.2)

55-65 years 1 (4.5)

> 65 years 0 (0.0)

Dyslexia Yes 1 (4.5)

No 21 (95.5)

Dutch native language Yes 21 (95.5)

No 1 (4.5)

Type of reader Motoric reader 1 (4.5)

Auditory reader 17 (77.3)

Visual reader 4 (18.2)

Data analysis

This mixed-method research produced quantitative data (e.g. test results) and qualitative data (e.g.

written texts) for triangulation and complementarity reasons. The reading test and memory test were analysed by a paired sample t-test. The questionnaires and interviews were open, axial and selectively coded (Baarda, De Goede & Teunissen, 2009). The coding schemes based on the data are displayed in Appendix F. The observation scheme showed a table of what type of behaviour of the participants and workshop trainers were present during the workshop Effectief studeren.

All instruments were pre-tested. A classical test analysis was done to improve the reliability of the reading comprehension test. Two extra texts were tested in order for the most suitable texts to be chosen. The analysis and results of the pre-testing can be read in Appendix G. Besides that, the aim was to have half of the participants receive test 1 and the other half receive test 2 before the workshop/online course commenced and vice versa in order to prevent text effect (Yen, 2012). A researcher, who was not involved in this inquiry, served to establish a measure of inter-rater reliability of the created categories of interviews and questionnaires. The external rater saw several examples and subsequently categorised quotes in the created categories. The cohen’s kappa of the inter-rater reliability for the workshop Effectief studeren was 0,91 and for the online course Snellezen was 0.80, both of which are deemed sufficiently high (Kottner et al., 2011).

(15)

15

Results

Results workshop Effectief studeren

Cognitive effects

The first learning goal of the Workshop Effectief studeren was to improve memory by remembering 30% more than before the workshop. This research tested this learning goal using a list of 18 words participants had to remember. Table 3 shows that the mean amount of remembered words pre-test was 9.59 words and post-test 10.06 words. The memory test showed no significant differences (p = 0.608).

However, the reading tests demonstrated significant increases in the amount of words per minute a participant read (p = .000). On average participants read at the pre-test 262.71 words per minute and after the explanation of the Z-movement 439.29 words per minute as can be seen in Table 3.

Table 3

Results workshop Effectief studeren

Mean SD Sig. (2-tailed)

Pair 1 post-test memory - pre-test memory .47 3.71 .608

Post-test memory 10.06 3.56

Pre-test memory 9.59 3.30

Pair 2 post-test reading speed – pre-test reading speed 176.59 131.79 .000

Post-test reading speed 439.29 156.00

Pre-test reading speed 262.71 91.30

Note. SD= standard deviation

Figure 3 shows a scatter plot of the WPM on the pre-test and WPM on the post-test. Line 1*x shows the line for no improvement in reading speed. Line 1.5*x shows the improvement in reading speed for 50% and line 2*x for doubling the reading speed. All participants improved their reading speed and four participants more than doubled their reading speed. Pearson’s correlation showed a significant relationship between WPM on the pre-test and WPM on the post-test (r = .0537; p = .026).

Furthermore, a significant correlation appeared between dyslexia and scores on the post-test (r = .500; p = .041).

(16)

16 Figure 3. WPM pre-test and post-test workshop Effectief studeren

It should be noted that the reading test did not have a reading comprehension test thus it could be possible that several people read too quickly to understand the text. The data of the focus group and questionnaires revealed different opinions about participant’s comprehension during speed reading. Several people admitted that their comprehension decreased because they missed words or details. Some participants described they read the second text differently :“Vooral de eerste keer was ik echt begrijpend, zin voor zin rustig aan het lezen zodat ik alles begreep. Ja en daarna was ik echt snel scannend aan het lezen en had ik ook wel veel minder begrip van de tekst.”.Other people said that their comprehension increased or stayed the same. Someone explained that reading the second text was better because she was more concentrated and relaxed.

Regarding to learning goal 3 (to learn new annotation techniques), participants also held different views about the possibility that they could draw their own mindmaps. The workshop did not have an effect for most participants regarding the use and drawing of a mindmap. Some people did already know the concept of mindmaps. Others said that they would like to have more information about how to apply mindmaps or have more practice: “Ik had er graag mee geoefend, zeker omdat we vaak abstracte dingen moeten leren.”. However, the people who thought that they would be able to draw their own mindmap said that they had a clear instruction and could apply it for their studies.

During the pre-test almost all participants said they regularly postpone studying. At the post- test, the workshop did not have an effect for the goal of recognizing study avoidance behaviour because most participants stated they were already able to recognise procrastination. Some participants added that the problem at hand is not recognizing study avoidance behaviour but rather acknowledging procrastination or changing their behaviour.

Several other goals of the workshop Effectief studeren are related to planning, such as setting feasible goals. Half of the participants mentioned that the workshop did not have an effect because they were already able to plan effectively. Other participants mentioned that the planning tips were

(17)

17 applicable and helped to set clear goals. Besides that, some participants said that it (e.g. Covey’s 4- kwadrants model) helps to create an overview for important and less important to do’s and assisted them in setting priorities.

Affective effects

The observation scheme showed that the workshop had positive effects on the participants. Most students were actively involved, interested and listened well. Several students asked questions and worked independently on assignments. A critical note on this research is that participants had to retain words for a longer period of time for the second memory test. The complete observation scheme can be read in appendix H.

The workshop Effectief studeren discussed several memory tricks. The use of colours, fantasy and a memory palace (also called the loci method) are tricks that participants mentioned to plan to implement and indeed applied. The memory tricks were fun to use and worked well according to several students. Other participants already implemented the memory tricks before participating in the workshop. This could explain why the pre-test concerning remembering scored relatively high (9.59 words). Current literature stated that people remember 7 (+/-) 2 pieces of information (Miller, 1956 as cited by Smith & Ragan, 2005). Furthermore, several participants said that they think the memory tricks are not relevant or applicable for the study (Chemical Engineering) because it involves abstract concepts. A participant said “nee, omdat dat niet zozeer van toepassing is op de vakken die ik heb of ik kan daar geen associaties mee maken.”.

Diverse opinions were mentioned regarding the usefulness and application of mindmaps. A couple of people thought that it is not applicable for a beta study, whereas a majority was willing to apply mindmaps. Other reasons for applying mindmaps, mentioned by participants, were that mindmaps offer a good overview of that which need to be learned and is also fun to apply.

The workshop Effectief studeren introduced Z-movement as meta conduction technique. The questionnaires and the focus group indicated that there were several people who were enthusiastic about this techniques because it showed very fast results. A participant of the focus group said:

“Waar ik me nooit bewust van ben geweest is dat je echt sneller gaat lezen als je er iets bij houdt. Dat vind ik wel heel handig.”. Several people mentioned this as a reason why they were willing to apply the Z-movement. However, someone disliked the meta-conduction techniques because it was distracting for her and someone else pointed out that she could not apply the Z-movement on a computer. Several people said that they were motivated to do the online course Snellezen because it seemed useful, fun, gives possibility for improvement and/or saves time when reading. One participant with dyslexia indicated that she thought that the online course Snellezen would not be able to help her to improve her reading speed because “In mijn geval werkte snellezen niet heel erg maar dat komt ook doordat ik al 3-4 jaar bijles heb gehad om sneller te kunnen lezen op de middelbare school en dat heeft ook niet geholpen. Ik zit nog steeds op hetzelfde niveau dus ik denk dat voor mij de cursus snellezen ook niet heel nuttig zou zijn. Ik blijf gewoon traag lezen.”. Two people said that they were afraid to miss information and one person was already satisfied with their reading speed.

Most participants were enthousiastic about the theme planning. “Ja, omdat het [salamimethod] overzichtelijk is, makkelijker is om mee te beginnen en een grotere voldoening geeft.”

was a typical quote of participants regarding the theme planning. Most people were willing to change their study behaviour according to the proposed planning techniques in the workshop. They liked that planning offers an overview, reduces stress and results in satisfied feelings which in turn motivate to keep going. Besides that, one person said that the Covey’s model “lijkt een goede manier van planning waardoor ik minder uitstel”. Some participants experienced Covey’s model as confronting and even stressful. However, the participant that had increased stress, mentioned that he would now start with describing smaller, concrete tasks.

As a result of the workshop Effectief studeren most participants were motivated to tidy their learning environment in order to improve studying and to work more relaxed. According to post-test

(18)

18 2, several students indeed cleaned their learning environment. Other positive effects were that they chose other music, banned distractions (e.g. phone) and assured sufficient lightning in the room.

Some participants were not willing to change their study environment as they were already satisfied with it.

Unrelated to its specific goals/themes, the workshop Effectief studeren did also have a positive effect as it worked as a reminder to study more diligently. Three students answered the question if they were able to study more effectively due to the workshop Effectief studeren that they were now more motivated/dedicated to study. Someone described that she changed her study behaviour as a result of the workshop because the workshop “een extra duwtje in de rug heeft gegeven om het daadwerkelijk te gaan doen”.

The long-term effects could not be assessed because participants did not have the possibility to implement advice before the post-test 2, as students did not have any exams or possibilities to apply the techniques in their study. This was mentioned by participants as reasons why they were unable to notice if their grades improved or they were able to study more effectively, in the long- term.

Results online course Snellezen Brons

Cognitive effects

The results of the paired samples t-test showed significant differences (p = .000) between the words per minute participants read on average in the reading tests at the post-test and pre-test as can be seen in Table 4. On average the reading speed increased from 284.49 words per minute to 425.79 words per minute after the online course Snellezen. Additionally, the comprehension score on the pre- and post-test did not show significant differences (p = .535). Besides that, pearson’s correlation showed a significant negative relationship between WPM average on post-test and comprehension on the post-test (r = .-.453; p = .034).

Table 4

Results online course Snellezen paired differences WPM average and comprehension score

Pair 1 WPM average post-test - WPM average pre-test 141.30 126.04 .000

WPM average post-test 425.79 150.20

WPM average pre-test 284.49 102.94

Pair 2 Comprehension post-test - comprehension pre-test -0.23 1.69 .535

Comprehension post-test 8.00 1.27

Comprehension pre-test 8.23 1.77

Figure 4 shows a scatter plot of the WPM average on the pre-test and WPM average on the post-test. Line 1*x shows the line for no improvement in reading speed. It appeared that only one participant (red dot), who already had a high reading speed decreased the reading speed. Besides that, two participants did not really change in the reading speed. Line 1.5*x shows the improvement in reading speed for 50%. In line with the results of Table 4, most participants increased their reading speed around 50%. Line 2*x shows an improvement of doubling the reading speed. Two participants almost reached that goal and four participants more than doubled their reading speed.

(19)

19 Figure 4. WPM average pre-test and post-test online course Snellezen Brons

Both the pre- and post-test were divided into two texts. A critical note is that reading text 1 and reading text 2 of the pre-test showed significant differences (p = .005) as well as reading text 1 and reading text 2 of the post-test demonstrated significant differences (p = .018). However, significant differences also exist between reading text 1 of the pre-test and reading text 1 of the post-test (p = .001) and reading text 2 of the pre-test and reading text 2 of the post-test (p = .000).

Thus it could be assumed that the online course Snellezen increased the reading speed. Table 5 shows more details about the paired differences of the WPM of the texts.

Table 5

Results online course Snellezen paired differences WPM texts

Pair 1 WPM pre-test text2 - WPM pre-test text 1 -45.43 68.04 .005

Pair 2 WPM post-test text 2 – WPM post-test text 1 -93.06 169.55 .018

Pair 3 WPM post-test text 1 – WPM pre-test text 1 165.12 193.02 .001

Pair 4 WPM post-test text 2 – WPM post-test text 2 117.49 108.68 .000

Furthermore, participants also had to do three reading tests of ProfAct in the online course (a pre-test, mid-test and post-test). Those tests showed significant differences in reading speed and no

(20)

20 significant differences for comprehension scores. Table 6 demonstrates the paired differences of ProfAct’s tests.

Table 6

Results online course Snellezen paired differences ProfAct tests

Pair 1 WPM test 1 – WPM test 0 163.70 93.55 .000

Pair 4 Comprehension test 1 – Comprehension test 0 -0.90 16.41 .809

Comprehension scores are in percentages calculated

The questionnaires showed several arguments why the online course Snellezen had positive effects on the reading speed. Several participants mentioned that their concentration positively influenced their reading speed: “Ja omdat ik door de snelheid minder afdwaal, concentratie is beter!”. Related to an increased concentration, reduction of backskipping was mentioned by participants as explanation for their increased reading speed: “Ja, omdat ik geconcentreerder lees, daarmee sneller over de regels ga, en minder vaak teruglees”. Furthermore, the online course Snellezen changed for some participants how they read. They learnt how to scan text and search for valuable information while understanding the text instead of reading every word slowly. A participant described this effect as “Doordat ik van mezelf denk sneller te kunnen lezen, ben ik anders gaan kijken naar teksten. Voor de cursus las ik teksten bijna altijd met veel aandacht aan elke zin.

Door de techniek in een oogopslag meer woorden te kunnen zien (visueel veld) lees ik teksten die ik eerst nog moet beoordelen of ze dat zijn wat ik zoek, veel sneller. Ik kijk hierbij op het niveau van de tekst en de dichtheid van nuttige informatie.”. This participant mentioned that he needs less time for reading a text but that he now starts to read more and thus spends more time reading. Moreover, tips and techniques are mentioned as helpful improving their reading speed. The results of the exercises and tests are mentioned as proof that their reading speed increased.

A lot of respondents said that the online course Snellezen did not have an effect on their success at school or work. A participant said that "Tempo is niet bepalend voor succes”. Another participant shared this view and stated that reading comprehension is important. Thus, she did not apply the techniques for her study because she was afraid to miss key points. Yet another student mentioned that knowing what you read is more important for passing an exam than the reading speed. Professional/scientific literature was also mentioned as too difficult for reading at speed reading rate as it was already difficult enough to read those texts slowly. Other reasons that the online course Snellezen did not improve the success at work or school is because that they did not have the possibility to apply speed reading or needed more time for practice to get used to the techniques. One participant answered the question if her results were improved at school or work

“nog niet, omdat ik daarna niet meer gewoon vakken en toetsen gedaan heb, maar met een eindopdracht, waardoor het allemaal sowieso anders is dan voorheen. Het is wel handig bij het lezen van teksten die ik nodig heb om informatie te vinden.”

The reading tests, the quantitative data, showed no significant decrease of reading comprehension. However, the qualitative data indicated that several participants had a decreased reading comprehension and that they forgot or overlooked words when speed reading. A participant explained that her reading comprehension decreased because "ik veel kernwoorden wel mis in de teksten. Het is bijvoorbeeld lastig om het standpunt van de schrijver te bepalen, of de verbanden te