Web pages invite an interactive approach to reading, and are designed to promote certain advertisements or features over others. This is not to say that some print publications do not encourage a certain amount of interactivity. Magazines and newspapers use color, text and detail to entice the reader to investigate an advertisement or article more thoroughly than the rest of the publication. The very act of choosing one article or ad to peruse over another is interactive to a point. However, this freedom of choice is nowhere more liberal than on the World Wide Web, where millions of sites and pages beckon with the promise of unlimited knowledge and information. We have learned, as experienced web explorers, that the option of clicking on a button or graphic will produce new experiences. Our next new car, vacation, book, appliance or even relationship is only a mouse click away.

So what drives us, in the pursuit of information, to choose one link over another, or to gravitate towards one section of the web page, while ignoring the rest? The answer may be in the way that we process the written word. Experienced web designers are intimate with information decoding processes because they have the task of creating a visual menu of choices that will guide the viewer through the site. The path the viewer chooses to take will depend on how effectively the designer has structured the text, and how quickly the viewer can decode the information, and construct meaning. Schema activation, advance organizers, and other cues are often utilized to assist the viewer in relating new information to what is already known, or is desired to be known (Bruning, Schraw, and Ronning, 1995). The author of the site is depending on the probability that the viewer is at least somewhat interested in the site, and is eager to seek new information. In this way, the site is organized so that the viewer may progress in a logical, yet controlled fashion. Text signals, or the use of bold, italicized, oversized and underlined text to attract attention, also play a major role in luring the viewer into one direction or another (Bruning, et.al.).

In the following section, I have located three webtexts of differing structure and subject matter. The first text, http://meme.essortment.com/copyrightlawla_rmep.htm, is text-centered. There are no visual images, but occasionally advertisements do "pop up" on the screen. Considering the seriousness of the subject (Copyright Law for the Layman), these ads are intrusive and irrelevant. One advertises a site that will search your name to determine whether someone owes you money or not. Another features "Family Feud," a television game show. These and other ads on the site are clearly an invitation to the viewer to abandon the search for information on Copyright Law and find out instead whether money is owed, when a daytime game show airs, where to buy a Harlequin Romance novel, or see what your unborn child looks like. This text clearly does not intend for the viewer to stay focused on the page, and is a blatant advertising vehicle for the hosting site. The author has not provided for fixation, text signals, or any other cues, within the text and is allowing the ads to take precedent. It is doubtful that the reader will be able to focus his or her attention for very long on this page.

The second text I reviewed is more focused on the topic presented. The web page is about Public Broadcasting Service’s POV Documentary Series. This particular broadcast aired on August 28, 2001 and featured a documentary called High School. Since the page is intended to be informational and promotional in nature, there is no extraneous advertising, and the page is logically organized. The page is at

http://www.pbs.org/pov/highschool/index.html. As with most visually driven documents, the images tend to capture my attention first, with the large text bringing my eye to other areas of the page. In analyzing this page, I do not think that it was organized with a data driven schema in mind or a top-down, or conceptually-driven processing format. The big picture tends to emerge first, based on the viewer’s prior knowledge of what is being presented, and then the other subordinate areas, which may or may not interest the viewer, become obvious. In art, and other visual design fields of study, the composition of the work directs where the artist intends the viewer to look. The viewer is guided to the emphasized area of the art first, and then the eye can wander to other areas of the work, proceeding from the most obvious to the least. The viewer’s eye should circle the artwork, and then return to the area of emphasis, to begin to construct meaning from the art (Gatto, Porter and Selleck, 1987). The meaning constructed will depend on the viewer’s knowledge of the work, the artist, the time frame the art was made, and the subject matter. Web design is most dependent on these principles of visual art, so it is not an accident that well-organized pages should allow cognitive processing to occur in a logical manner. If we are to compare this organizational model to Gough’s model (1972) of data-driven processing, we might assume that the presentation of the page is dependent on a Bottom-up system of processing. The eye does track from item to item, much in the same way Gough (1972) described the eye movements of children in reading text (Bruning, et. al.). It also may follow a conceptually driven model of processing, proposed by Goodman (1994). Goodman suggested that the decoding process may follow a systemic and ordered transition from visual, to perceptual (identification of words and letters), to syntactic (identifying the structure of a text), to finally semantic (constructing meaning based upon the input) (Bruning, et. al.)

Yet, because of the dependence the viewer may have on prior knowledge of the POV documentaries, and because the methods of decoding the page really rely on both top-down and bottom-up processing, we may conclude that the page is interactive in nature. Most web texts may be categorized in this manner. Just and Carpenter (1987) developed their own model which proposed that reading is an interactive process. A reader begins to construct meaning from a text at the first fixation, and then proceeds through the text. The decoding process will depend on the individual’s reading ability, the knowledge of the content area, and the reader’s motivation for reading the text in the first place (Bruning, et. al).

The third Web text I reviewed also follows Just and Carpenter’s (1987) interactive model. This page focuses on the phenomenally popular upcoming Harry Potter movie, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. The page can be found at:

http://harrypotter.warnerbros.com/home.html. Due to the unprecedented popularity of the Harry Potter series, it is logical to assume that many children will be visiting the site to find information on the film. The site is highly interactive, with sound accompanying the text both in the background, and as the viewer "mouses" over certain words. The words also enlarge as the viewer moves the mouse over, to stimulate recognition and interest. Most, if not all, individuals that access this site will have some familiarity with the Harry Potter books and stories, and will recognize the various links, such as Diagon’s Alley (a shopping mall for person’s of magical nature), the Daily Prophet (the wizarding world’s news publication) and Platform 9 ¾, (the dimensional portal to the Hogwart’s Express). Each subsequent page is also interactive and allows the viewer to perform various "Potter-style" feats. It is a highly entertaining site and has the potential to keep the viewer occupied for hours.

The interactivity and design of webtexts must allow for fairly rapid processing by necessity; the faster one is able to peruse and garner the information needed, the faster one will be able to move on to another level. The ultimate goal of most webtexts is to inform, sell a product to or convince the viewer. This interaction must take place very quickly, or the viewer will undoubtedly move on to another page. When we take this into account, the debate of phonics vs. whole language, or even how information is processed seems rather irrelevant. However, processing of information is taking place on a fairly sophisticated level. The viewer must fixate, wander, apply prior knowledge, construct meaning, decode new words, and make cognitive choices within a very short frame of time. Does this interactivity help kids to read better? This may not be clear, but it does suggest that the speed of learning may be enhanced by viewing web material. If kids are engaged by the material, are the mental processes that guide retention and acquisition of information also being stimulated? And will this stimulation result in the input being sorted into long term memory? These questions are being raised by many researchers, including myself, in regards to using educational technology in the classroom. The answers may, I believe, surprise us all.

Bruning, Roger H., Ronning, Royce R. and Schraw, Gregory J. 1999. Cognitive Psychology and Instruction, Third Edition. Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice-Hall. Pp. 235-294.

Gatto, Joseph A., Porter, Albert W., Selleck, Jack. 1987. Exploring Visual Design, Second Edition. Worcester, MA., Davis Publications. P. 186