From Learner Needs to Digital Design Adapting Reciprocal Teaching for Multimodal News Reading
DOI:
10.70211/ltsm.3026-7196.693Published:
2026-10-21Downloads
Abstract
Digital news reading requires learners to connect written and visual information while monitoring their understanding. However, the availability of multimedia resources does not establish how those resources support reading. This study examines how learner needs and limitations in existing materials informed the adaptation of Reciprocal Teaching into digital materials for Grade 7 Indonesian language instruction. A qualitative descriptive approach combined an analysis of two textbooks, a learner needs questionnaire, teacher interviews, and development documents, including expert review records. Reported questionnaire percentages were interpreted descriptively, while qualitative evidence was coded, categorized, compared, and synthesized to trace design decisions. Guidance in generating questions was the most frequently reported process-related need (85.0%), whereas easy and flexible access was the most frequently reported environmental need (94.0%). The synthesis identified six support requirements: initial orientation, attention direction, comprehension repair, information selection and organization, systematic guidance, and verbal–visual integration. These requirements informed adaptations of predicting, questioning, clarifying, and summarizing, represented through multimodal cues, focused prompts, contextual vocabulary support, sequenced activities, and integrated assessment. Expert feedback addressed linguistic clarity, visual consistency, and interface organization. The contribution is an explicit account of how reported needs were translated into reading functions and digital design decisions. The findings establish a design rationale rather than evidence of improved comprehension, usability, or transfer to independent news evaluation.
Keywords:
Digital Reading Materials Learner Needs Multimodal News Reading Reciprocal Teaching Reading ComprehensionReferences
REFERENCES
[1] N. K. Duke and K. B. Cartwright, “The Science of Reading Progresses: Communicating Advances Beyond the Simple View of Reading,” Reading Research Quarterly, vol. 56, no. S1, pp. S25–S44, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.411
[2] N. K. Duke, A. E. Ward, and P. D. Pearson, “The Science of Reading Comprehension Instruction,” The Reading Teacher, vol. 74, no. 6, pp. 663–672, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1993
[3] J. Coiro, “Toward a Multifaceted Heuristic of Digital Reading to Inform Assessment, Research, Practice, and Policy,” Reading Research Quarterly, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 9–31, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.302
[4] M. Reiber-Kuijpers, M. Kral, and P. Meijer, “Digital reading in a second or foreign language: A systematic literature review,” Computers & Education, vol. 163, Art. no. 104115, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104115
[5] X. Chen and Y. Xiao, “Pathways to digital reading literacy among secondary school students: A multilevel analysis using data from 31 economies,” Computers & Education, vol. 218, Art. no. 105090, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105090
[6] L. Salmerón, L. Altamura, P. Delgado, A. Karagiorgi, and C. Vargas, “Reading comprehension on handheld devices versus on paper: A narrative review and meta-analysis of the medium effect and its moderators,” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 116, no. 2, pp. 153–172, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000830
[7] L. Altamura, C. Vargas, and L. Salmerón, “Do New Forms of Reading Pay Off? A Meta-Analysis on the Relationship Between Leisure Digital Reading Habits and Text Comprehension,” Review of Educational Research, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 53–88, 2025. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231216463
[8] D. Guo, S. Zhang, K. L. Wright, and E. M. McTigue, “Do You Get the Picture? A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Graphics on Reading Comprehension,” AERA Open, vol. 6, no. 1, Art. no. 2332858420901696, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420901696
[9] J. Farrar, E. Arizpe, and R. Lees, “Thinking and learning through images: a review of research related to visual literacy, children’s reading and children’s literature,” Education 3-13, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 993–1005, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2024.2357892
[10] B. Tomlinson, “Is Materials Development Progressing?,” Language Teaching Research Quarterly, vol. 15, pp. 1–20, 2020. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2020.15.01
[11] A. M. Guerrettaz, C. S. Mathieu, S. Lee, and A. Berwick, “Materials use in language classrooms: A research agenda,” Language Teaching, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 547–564, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444821000021
[12] S. McKenney and T. C. Reeves, “Educational design research: Portraying, conducting, and enhancing productive scholarship,” Medical Education, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 82–92, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14280
[13] N. Mafarja, M. M. Mohamad, H. Zulnaidi, and H. M. Fadzil, “Using of reciprocal teaching to enhance academic achievement: A systematic literature review,” Heliyon, vol. 9, no. 7, Art. no. e18269, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18269
[14] T. L. Vuong and J. Steklács, “Trends in research on reciprocal teaching: a systematic review,” Cogent Education, vol. 12, no. 1, Art. no. 2491963, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2025.2491963
[15] S. S. Kula and Y. Budak, “The effects of reciprocal teaching on reading comprehension, retention on learning and self-efficacy perception,” Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 493–522, 2020. https://doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2020.017
[16] M. Juhkam, A. L. Jõgi, P. Soodla, and M. Aro, “Development of reading fluency and metacognitive knowledge of reading strategies during reciprocal teaching: do these changes actually contribute to reading comprehension?,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 14, Art. no. 1191103, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1191103
[17] N. Alasmari, “Is Internet Reciprocal Teaching the Remedy for Saudi EFL Learners’ Reading Difficulties During the Covid-19 Pandemic?,” Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 324–332, 2021. https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.509.2021.83.324.332
[18] R. E. Mayer, Multimedia Learning, 3rd ed. Cambridge University Press, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316941355
[19] M. Noetel et al., “Multimedia Design for Learning: An Overview of Reviews With Meta-Meta-Analysis,” Review of Educational Research, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 413–454, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211052329
[20] D. Alpizar, O. O. Adesope, and R. M. Wong, “A meta-analysis of signaling principle in multimedia learning environments,” Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 2095–2119, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09748-7
[21] N. Sundararajan and O. Adesope, “Keep it Coherent: A Meta-Analysis of the Seductive Details Effect,” Educational Psychology Review, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 707–734, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09522-4
[22] R. Yawiloeng, “Using instructional scaffolding and multimodal texts to enhance reading comprehension: Perceptions and attitudes of EFL students,” Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 877–894, 2022. https://www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/4142
[23] A. Yanagisawa, S. Webb, and T. Uchihara, “How do different forms of glossing contribute to L2 vocabulary learning from reading? A meta-regression analysis,” Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 411–438, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263119000688
[24] N. Ramezanali, T. Uchihara, and F. Faez, “Efficacy of Multimodal Glossing on Second Language Vocabulary Learning: A Meta‐analysis,” TESOL Quarterly, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 105–133, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.579
[25] L. Fiorella, “Making Sense of Generative Learning,” Educational Psychology Review, vol. 35, no. 2, Art. no. 50, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09769-7
[26] S. T. M. Bogaerds-Hazenberg, J. Evers-Vermeul, and H. van den Bergh, “A Meta‐Analysis on the Effects of Text Structure Instruction on Reading Comprehension in the Upper Elementary Grades,” Reading Research Quarterly, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 435–462, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.311
[27] K. Koderi, M. Aridan, and A. B. Muslim, “Pengembangan Mobile Learning Untuk Penguasaan Mufrodat Siswa MTs,” Arabiyatuna : Jurnal Bahasa Arab, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 265–278, 2020. https://doi.org/10.29240/jba.v4i2.1769
[28] U. Hijriyah, M. Aridan, A. N. Mizan, A. Dealintang, and L. Yuniarti, “Development of Digital Comic Media for Learning Qira'ah for Fifth Grade Students of Madrasah Ibtidaiyah,” Arabiyatuna : Jurnal Bahasa Arab, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 693–710, 2022. https://doi.org/10.29240/jba.v6i2.4361
[29] R. Masykur, I. Irwandani, M. Aridan, N. E. Susilowati, and S. Soeharto, “Developing and Validating E-Learning Module for Islamic Higher Education Digital Literacy in Preventing Hoax (EMODILPH),” Tadris: Jurnal Keguruan dan Ilmu Tarbiyah, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 341–355, 2023. https://doi.org/10.24042/tadris.v8i2.14549
[30] J. Breakstone et al., “Students’ Civic Online Reasoning: A National Portrait,” Educational Researcher, vol. 50, no. 8, pp. 505–515, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x211017495
[31] S. McGrew, “Learning to evaluate: An intervention in civic online reasoning,” Computers & Education, vol. 145, Art. no. 103711, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103711
[32] S. Barzilai and C. A. Chinn, “A review of educational responses to the ‘post-truth’ condition: Four lenses on ‘post-truth’ problems,” Educational Psychologist, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 107–119, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1786388
[33] L. Doyle, C. McCabe, B. Keogh, A. Brady, and M. McCann, “An overview of the qualitative descriptive design within nursing research,” Journal of Research in Nursing, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 443–455, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987119880234
[34] H. Morgan, “Conducting a qualitative document analysis,” The Qualitative Report, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 64–77, 2022. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5044
[35] V. Braun and V. Clarke, “One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis?,” Qualitative Research in Psychology, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 328–352, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
[36] J. Shao, Y. Chen, X. Wei, X. Li, and Y. Li, “Effects of regulated learning scaffolding on regulation strategies and academic performance: A meta-analysis,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 14, Art. no. 1110086, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1110086
[37] N. M. Brashier and E. J. Marsh, “Judging Truth,” Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 499–515, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010419-050807
[38] C. A. W. Axelsson, M. Guath, and T. Nygren, “Learning How to Separate Fake from Real News: Scalable Digital Tutorials Promoting Students’ Civic Online Reasoning,” Future Internet, vol. 13, no. 3, Art. no. 60, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi13030060
[39] S. Wineburg, J. Breakstone, S. McGrew, M. D. Smith, and T. Ortega, “Lateral reading on the open Internet: A district-wide field study in high school government classes,” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 114, no. 5, pp. 893–909, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000740
[40] S. McGrew and V. L. Byrne, “Conversations after lateral reading: Supporting teachers to focus on process, not content,” Computers & Education, vol. 185, Art. no. 104519, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104519
[41] S. McGrew and J. Breakstone, “Civic Online Reasoning Across the Curriculum: Developing and Testing the Efficacy of Digital Literacy Lessons,” AERA Open, vol. 9, Art. no. 23328584231176451, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584231176451
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dinda Dwi Pratiwi, Yeti Mulyati, Rosita Rahma
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
