Cite this article as:

Solovyova V. A. Risks and Prospects of Using Educational Internet Resources. Izvestiya of Saratov University. Educational Acmeology. Developmental Psychology, 2018, vol. 7, iss. 2, pp. 183-?. DOI:

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0).

Risks and Prospects of Using Educational Internet Resources


Undoubtedly, Internet resources are sources of educational and scientific information that are in demand among students. Therefore, their development should be based on the fundamental pedagogical principles, one of which is the principle of natural conformity. This fact reveals the most important condition that predetermines the success of the human-machine educational system – the resource’s correspondence to the biological characteristics of the learner, including his/her cognitive processes (processes of perception, thinking, and memory). Thus, the purpose of this work was to study what parameters of the provision of educational information on the screen will affect the productivity of the student who works with it. The hypothesis of the study was the assumption that students will be more successful in memorizing educational information in the event that: 1. the educational text is simple; 2. the text uses graphic materials; 3. the didactic unit is located in the “attention zone” of the student. The basis for the study was an experiment in which 100 students from the SSU named after N. G. Chernyshevsky took part. The subjects had to study 10 educational texts on the computer screen and answer questions about their content. The eye movements of the participants were recorded using the “eye tracking” technology. It is revealed that the more complex the text, the faster students read it and remember it worse. It is revealed that the graphic material is a “blind zone” for a student and does not contribute to increasing the memorability of the material on the screen, but its availability subjectively simplifies the work with information for a student. It is also established that the location of the didactic unit on the screen does not have a significant effect on the success of its capturing. These results can serve as a basis for developing a methodology for building educational Internet resources in accordance with the conscious and unconscious requests of the main participant in the educational process – the student.


​1. Shabanov G. A. Pedagogicheskie problemy obespecheniya kachestva onlayn-obrazovaniya [Pedagogical problems of ensuring quality of online education]. Vysshee obrazovanie segodnya [The Higher Education Today], 2017, no. 5, pp. 9–12 (in Russian).

2. Maloshonok N. G. Vzaimosvyaz’ ispol’zovaniya Interneta i mul’timediynykh tekhnologiy v obrazovatel’nom protsesse so studencheskoy vovlechennost’yu [How Using the Internet and Multimedia Technology in the Learning Process Correlates with Student Engagement]. Voprosy obrazovaniya [Educational Studies Moscow], 2016, no. 4, pp. 59–83 (in Russian).

3. Smetannikova N. N. Chtenie s lista i s ekrana [Reading the paper and onscreen]. Vysshee obrazovanie segodnya [The Higher Education Today], 2012, no. 1, pp. 42–48 (in Russian).

4. Nichols M. Reading and Studying on the Screen: An Overview of Literature Towards Good Learning Design Practice. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning, 2016, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 33–43.

5. Gramkova I. I., Savenkova M. V. Internet v zhizni studenchestva [Internet in the life of students]. Byulleten’ meditsinskikh internet-konferentsiy [Bulletin of medical internet conferences), 2016, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 586 (in Russian).

6. Mangen A., Walgermo B. R., Brønnick K. Reading Linear Texts on Paper Versus Computer Screen: Effects on Reading Comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 2013, vol. 58, pp. 61–68. DOI: https://

7. Tanner M. J. Digital vs. Print: Reading Comprehension and the Future of the Book. SLIS Student Research Journal, 2014, vol. 4, iss. 2. Available at: http://scholarworks. (accessed 13 August 2017).

8. Mamina R. I., Moskovchuk L. S. Tekstovaya kul’tura v usloviyakh sovremennoy informatsionnoy tsivilizatsii [The text culture under conditions of modern information civilization]. Bibliosfera [Bibliosfera], 2015, no. 4, pp. 3–8 (in Russian).

9. Feoktistova A. A., Krasovskaya N. I. Vliyanie informatsionnykh tekhnologiy na aktual’nost’ obrazovatel’nykh paradigm [Infl uence of information technologies on the relevance of educational paradigms]. Vysshee obrazovanie segodnya [The Higher Education Today], 2016, no. 11, pp. 12–14 (in Russian).

10. Kolychev G. S., Simbirtseva N. A. Na puti k mediagramotnoy lichnosti: ot teorii k praktike [Towards a Media Literate Person: from Theory to Practice]. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie v Rossii [Pedagogical Education in Russia], 2016, no. 6, pp. 110–115 (in Russian).

11. Benedetto S., Drai-Zerbib V., Pedrotti M., Tissier G., Baccino T. E-Readers and Visual Fatigue. PLoS ONE, 2013, vol. 8, no. 12, article no. e83676. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083676

12. Grigor’eva E. I. Otlichie elektronnogo izdaniya ot pechatnogo. Osobennosti chteniya s ekrana (The difference between an electronic publication and a printed one. Features of reading from the screen). Zaochnyy seminar «Otlichie elektronnogo izdaniya ot pechatnogo» (Correspondence seminar “Difference between electronic publication and printed”). Available at: les/ File/2013/otlichie_elektronnogo_izdaniya_pechatnogo(1) (accessed 15 August 2017) (in Russian).

13. Kloktunova N. A., Venig S. B., Solov’eva V. A. Ergonomicheskie trebovaniya k predstavleniyu obrazovatel’noy informatsii na ekrane [Ergonomic requirements for on-screen educational information]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii [Higher Education in Russia], 2017, no. 4, pp. 152–159 (in Russian).

14. Podlasyy I. P. Pedagogika: in 3 books. Kn. 2: Teoriya i tekhnologii obucheniya: uchebnik dlya vuzov (Pedagogy. Book 2: Theory and Technology of Teaching). Moscow, 2008. 750 p. (in Russian).

15. Mizernov I. Yu., Grashchenko L. A. Analiz metodov otsenki slozhnosti teksta [Analysis of Methods for Assessing the Complexity of Text]. Novye informatsionnye tekhnologii v avtomatizirovannykh sistemakh [New information technologies in automated systems], 2015, no. 18, pp. 572–581 (in Russian).

16. Solnyshkina S. I., Kisel’nikov A. S. Slozhnost’ teksta: etapy izucheniya v otechestvennom prikladnom yazykoznanii [Text complexity: study phases in Russian linguistics]. Vestn. Tom. gos. un-ta, Ser. Filologiya [Tomsk State University Journal of Philology], 2015, no. 6 (38), pp. 86–99 (in Russian). DOI: 10.17223/19986645/38/7

17. Humphreys A. H., Humphreys J. T. Reading Diffi culty Levels of Selected Articles in the Journal of Research in Music Education and Journal of Historical Research in Music Education. Music Education Research International, 2013, vol. 6, pp. 15–25.

18. Venig S. B., Solovyova V. A. Eye-tracking: Regularities of Educational Information Searching. International Annual Edition of Applied Psychology: Theory, Research, and Practice, 2016, vol. 3, iss. 1, pp. 97–111.

19. Satarov A. V., Kurochkina V. S. Vizualizatsiya kontenta tekhnicheskikh distsiplin pri realizatsii distantsionnogo obrazovaniya [Visualization of the content of technical disciplines in the implementation of remote education]. Psikhologiya i pedagogika: metodika i problemy prakticheskogo primeneniya [Psychology and pedagogy: methods and problems of practical application], 2016, no. 48, pp. 157–163 (in Russian).

Full text (in Russian):
(downloads: 198)
Short text (in English):
(downloads: 318)