Assignment #1: The Literature Review
The Efficacy of Educational Technology in Reading Instruction
Bob Esliger
University of British Columbia
ETEC 500 – Dr. Clifford Falk, Professor
April 11th, 2011
A Review of the Literature
Introduction
It could be argued that much of the research base from the last ten years regarding the use of educational technology to support reading instruction is out-of-date and that it cannot be used to answer today’s questions; however, it is thought to be beneficial to review the most current research as it can be helpful in informing practice and future directions.
Reading skill development is foundational and essential for continued successful academic performance. Stevenson & Hackett (2009) suggest that children who are unable to develop basic literacy skills may remain vulnerable for academic failure throughout their academic careers. Therefore, the focus of this literature review is on the utilization of technology as a tool to support reading skill development in the primary grades.
The nature and diversity of student needs presented in today’s primary classroom requires a differentiated approach in an effort to address the diversity of needs. Tobin & McInnes (2008) tell us that differentiated instruction (DI) helps students when teachers directly adapt content and processes to address the diversity of learning needs in their classrooms; similarly, teachers also require a variety of teaching strategies that match their professional practice, curriculum focus and available resources. Tobin & McInnes (2008) confirm that DI is solidly rooted in theory, is evidence-based, and incorporates sociocultural practice and is therefore a sound practice through which to address student needs. It is also important for teachers to understand that struggling students often require explicit, direct and extended instruction beyond what is provided in the whole-class setting. Therefore, through DI the educator can proactively assess, accommodate and celebrate student diversity in creative ways for the benefit of all learners (Tobin & McInnes, 2008).
It is common knowledge in the field of primary education that the teaching of reading incorporates the five skill areas of phonological awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension. These five skills must be explicitly taught and practiced in order for students to become proficient. Holum & Gahala (2001) report that technology is moving reading instruction beyond the traditional oral and print-based approaches to those that are online, use electronic text and/or incorporate multi-media. Many computer assisted instructional (CAI) programs have assessment and tracking mechanisms built into the software which permits educators to provide timely, explicit interventions to remediate a specific skill area. To this end, Torgesen (2006) confirmed that effective school-level interventions should be comprised of a method of identifying struggling students and providing immediate assistance, a school culture that is motivated to participate in student assessment and data tracking, educator participation in grade level meetings to analyze data, adequate staffing to implement interventions, adequate resources, and ongoing professional development.
The remainder of this literature review focuses on six research studies that have evaluated the use of technology to assist with developing reading skills with primary students, grades K to 3.
Fast ForWord (FFW) (Gemm Learning)
Hook, Macaruso & Jones (2001) investigated the benefits of the Fast ForWord reading program on the development of reading and spelling skills in children with reading disabilities. These authors also studied the program’s effect on phonemic awareness, semantics, syntax, rapid naming and verbal working memory. Both short term and long term benefits were tracked over a two year period. Students were selected on the basis of a flyer distributed through a newspaper in the greater Boston, Massachusetts area. Students were required to have an IQ of 80 or above and a verbal IQ of 90 or above and students with a history of emotional disturbance were excluded. Thirty-one students met criteria, were Caucasian and were from middle to upper-middle class backgrounds. The students were divided into three groups with a group of eleven students using the Fast ForWord program, a group of nine students taking part in a non-technology based Orton Gillingham program and a third group being the control group. This research showed that both the treatment groups made gains in phonemic awareness while only the Orton Gillingham group made gains in word attack. Over the two year period both the Fast ForWord and the control group made gains in phonemic awareness and all other areas of reading. Hook, Macaruso & Jones (2001) determined that the multisensory approach used with the Fast ForWord and Orton Gillingham groups resulted in significant reading skill development while the technology-based FFW program did not result in additional nor faster skill development.
Phonics Based Reading and Strategies for Older Students (Lexia Learning Systems)
Macaruso, Hook & McCabe (2006) examined the benefits of two computer assisted instructional (CAI) programs, Phonics Based Reading and Strategies for Older Students to supplement grade one classroom literacy instruction. The study focused on ten grade one classes from the greater Boston, Massachusetts School District. There were ninety-two students in the treatment group (52 male, 40 female) and eighty-seven in the control group (43 male, 44 female). The students were from diverse socio-cultural backgrounds and half of all students qualified for free or reduced lunch. Nine students in the treatment and three students in the control group were eligible for special education services. The results revealed that students in both the treatment and control groups made significant gains in reading in addition to the discovery that the intensive phonics-based CAI program was proven to be more beneficial for struggling students, allowing them to catch-up to their peers.
Enhancing Learning Using New Technologies
Dwyer (2007) conducted seven case studies over a three year period, which included four high schools and three primary schools. All seven schools were located within New South Wales, Australia and were regionally representative with student and staff demographics and school culture considered. It must be noted that primary schools in Australia consist of grades K-6. Over the three year period 287 educator interviews and 71 classroom observations were conducted. Of these 287, 123 interviews and 30 classroom observations took place within the primary schools. Dwyer (2007) identified two issues from the primary school case studies which were related to limited time for and availability of technology resources, and that the primary curriculum worked against the integration of technology. Dwyer (2007) also determined that primary students were uninformed about the use of technology, that schools received insufficient system guidance and support for technology integration, and that there was a lack of curriculum priorities for all of the primary years, K-6.
Early Reading (Lexia Learning Systems)
In their study, Macaruso & Walker (2008) explored the benefits of a phonics-based computer assisted program (CAI) for kindergartners called Early Reading. Macaruso & Walker (2008) selected six kindergarten classes from two elementary schools in urban Boston, Massachusetts. One morning and two afternoon classes were randomly chosen as treatment groups and the other three classes were control groups. Their study was comprised of two groups of forty-seven students with one group of 23 males and 24 females making up the treatment group and the other group of 22 males and 25 females making up the control group. The students were from diverse sociocultural backgrounds which included many demographics and attributes, including students with special needs. Macaruso & Walker (2008) reported that there were no differences between treatment and control groups on pretest measures of pre-literacy skills. However, they reported that the treatment group significantly outperformed the control group on the posttest with the subgroup differences being most pronounced for children with the lowest pretest scores. Macaruso & Walker (2008) concluded that participation in CAI would be beneficial for all readers, but especially helpful for struggling readers.
Evaluation of 13 Commercial Software Programs
Lovell & Phillips (2009) conducted an evaluation of the suitability of 13 commercial CAI programs designed for the teaching of reading and writing in the primary grades (K-3) across Canada. The programs were assessed on interface design, content, instructional design, manufacturer’s educational claims and appropriateness of the program to supplement reading and writing instruction.
Lovell & Phillips (2009) documented that the multimedia capability of today’s CAI programs supports the teaching of phonological awareness skills and letter names; assists in building vocabulary; improves reading fluency and comprehension, and teaches the writing process and writing skill development. The authors also determined that without the evaluative and feedback components, technology use in the classroom would not be effective as an educational tool.
Through their research Lovell & Phillips (2009) also determined that the integration of CAI programs does not appear to be a priority in the primary schools in Canada. Based on the results of their study, two problems became clear; first, outdated curriculum resource lists contained programs that are not tools for the meaningful integration of instructional technology, and the second, the majority of the programs reviewed did not track student progress, provide feedback, or adapt to suit student needs, thereby limiting their usefulness in the classroom.
Early Reading Program-level II (Waterford)
Stevenson & Hackett (2009) studied the effects of the Waterford Early Reading Program on early reading development while also focusing on the attitudes of teachers and principals in using the program. Specifics about the location of the school district utilized in the study were not mentioned. 198 students were selected from 12 classes at six preschool sites. 86 students were placed in the treatment group and 112 formed a comparison group. Selection criteria included preK students with low test scores and classes that had no supplemental curricular supports in place. Both groups included students with similar socio-economic status, similar numbers of students for whom English was a second language and students who required Individualized Education Plans (IEPs). Results of this study indicated that using the software improved the ability of pre-kindergarteners to identify sounds associated with letters. The authors reported that the program may positively contribute to the development of emergent reading skills by providing individually paced lessons, success in developing phonological awareness, and exposure to technology; however, the authors also recognized that computer technology cannot replace the interactions between skilled educators and students.
Research Synthesis
There are several themes resonating through the results of these research articles on CAI programs that are worthy of note. Firstly, five studies with the exception of the one by Macaruso & Walker (2008) referenced the need for adequate professional development and follow-up focused on software use and teaching practice. The need for on-going professional development was also referenced by Tobin & McInnes (2008) as an important strategy in developing a teacher tool-kit of strategies, inclusive of CAI, in order to support teaching and learning.
Secondly, all selected research articles referenced the importance of the five most accepted areas in reading skill development: phonological awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension, among others. In addition through these studies it was determined that CAI programs all have a common focus of training students in phonics and phonemic awareness (Hook, Macaruso & Jones, 2001; Macaruso, Hook & McCabe, 2006; Macaruso & Walker, 2008 and Lovell & Phillips, 2009).
A third theme running through these articles was that CAI was good for all students as a general classroom strategy (Hook, Macaruso & Jones, 2001; Macaruso, Hook & McCabe, 2006; Lovell & Phillips, 2009 and Stevenson & Hackett, 2009).
Another theme identified was that the educator could never be replaced by computer technology. It was addressed by Hook, Macaruso & Jones (2001); Macaruso, Hook & McCabe (2006); Lovell & Phillips (2009) and Stevenson & Hackett (2009) that CAI on its own is not sufficient for teaching reading skills to children. A key implication of the Hook, Macaruso & Jones (2001) research was that the multisensory approach of both the educator and the technology produced equal effects and that the technology itself didn’t produce additional or faster skill development in the children.
A fifth theme derived from the articles is that although CAI was beneficial to the general student population it was even more effective for struggling learners (Macaruso, Hook & McCabe, 2006, Macaruso & Walker, 2008 and Lovell & Phillips, 2009).
Finally, although limited to three articles is the concept of educators being somewhat skeptical of the use of CAI in the primary grades (Dwyer, 2007; Stevenson & Hackett, 2009 and Lovell & Phillips, 2009). The research by Dwyer (2007) and Lovell & Phillips (2009) indicated that technology integration into the primary grades is not a high priority and that the primary curriculum works against the integration of technology into classroom instruction. In addition, the instructional technology that was found in classrooms by the authors of two studies determined that it was primarily used for drill-and-practice and as a reward for students.
Conclusion
The research reviewed creates a sense of hopefulness regarding the use of CAI to supplement reading instruction in the primary grades. The findings of this literature review indicates that what matters most for student success in reading skill development are differentiated approaches that maximize student participation and engagement, give them effective strategies to understand text, and strengthen their phonics and phonemic awareness skills. It is clear that more research involving technology integration in the primary curriculum, primary teacher attitude toward CAI in the classroom and the further development of technology-based reading programs specific for primary students is needed.
References
Dwyer, J. (2007). Computer-based Learning in a Primary School: Differences between the early and later years of primary schooling. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35(1), 89-103.
Holum, A. & Gahala, J. (2001). Critical Issue: Using Technology to Enhance Literacy Instruction. North Central Regional Education Lab, Oak Brook Il. Retrieved from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/reading/li300.htm
Hook, P. E., Macaruso, P. & Jones, S. (2001). Efficacy of Fast ForWord Training on Facilitating Acquisition of Reading Skills by Children with Reading Difficulties – A Longitudinal Study. Annals of Dyslexia, 51, 75-96.
Lovell, M. & Phillips, L. (2009). Commercial Software Programs Approved for Teaching Reading and Writing in the Primary Grades: Another Sobering Reality. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 197-216.
Macaruso, P. & Walker, A. (2008). The Efficacy of Computer-Assisted Instruction for Advancing Literacy Skills in Kindergarten Children. Reading Psychology, 29: 266-287.
Macaruso, P., Hook, P. E., & McCabe, R. (2006). The efficacy of computer-based supplementary phonics programs for advancing reading skills in at-risk elementary students. Journal of Research in Reading, 29, 162–172.
Stevenson, H.J. & Hackett, R.K. (2009). Should Four-Year Olds use Computers to Develop Emergent Literacy Skills?: A Study of the Waterford Early Reading Program. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 10 (2), 64-84.
Tobin, R. & McInnes, A. (2008). Accommodating differences: variations in differentiated literacy instruction in Grade 2/3 classrooms. Literacy, 42(1), 3-9.
Torgesen, J. K. (2006). Intensive reading interventions for struggling readers in early
elementary school: A principal’s guide. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction. Retrieved from http://www.centeroninstruction.org/files/Principal s Guide to Intervention.pdf
