Reading Rate and Comprehension as a Function of Computerized versus Traditional Presentation Mode: A Preliminary Study

Journal of Special Education Technology

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 1-12

  Sorrell, Christy A ^a   Bell, Sherry Mee ^b   McCallum, R Steve ^b  

^a Little Tennessee Valley Educational Cooperative   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 70649086686     PISSN: 01626434     EISSN: 23813121     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/016264340702200101     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Accelerated Reader (2006). Renaissance Learning, Inc. http://www.renlearn.com/ar/default.htm.
2. Advantage Learning Systems. (1999). Understanding reliability and validity. Wisconsin Rapids, WI: Author.
3. Allington R. I., (1984). Content coverage and contextual reading in reading groups. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16, 85–96.
4. Biemiller A., (1978). Relationships between oral reading rates for letters, words, and simple text in the development of reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 13, 223–253.
5. Breznitz Z., (1987). Increasing first graders' reading accuracy and comprehension by accelerating their reading rates. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 236–242.
6. Breznitz Z., (1988). Reading performance of first graders: The effect of pictorial distracters. Journal of Research in Education, 83, 47–53.
7. Carver R. P., (1982). Optimal rate of reading prose. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 56–58.
8. Carver R. P., (1990). Reading rate: A review of research and theory. San Diego, CA: Academic.
9. Clarfield J., Stoner G., (2005). The effects of computerized reading instruction on the academic performance of students identified with ADHD. School Psychology Review, 34(2), 246–254.
10. Cohen K., Bean G., Liberman M., Axelrod J., Romberg R., (1989). A pilot study to evaluate the impacts of the Xerox/Kurzweil Personal Reader with dyslexic children. Cambridge, MA: Kurzweil Computer Company.
11. Elkind J., (1998a). A study of the efficacy of the Kurzweil 3000 Reading Machine in enhancing poor reading performance. Portola Valley, CA: Lexia Institute.
12. Elkind J., (1998b). Computer reading machines for poor readers. Perspectives – The International Dyslexia Association, 24(2), 2–8.
13. Elkind J., Cohen K., Murray C., (1993). Using computer-based readers to improve reading comprehension of students with dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 42, 238–259.
14. Farmer M. E., Klein R., Bryson S. E., (1992). Computer-assisted reading: Effects of whole word feedback on fluency and comprehension in readers with severe disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 13(2), 50–60.
15. Fry E., (1968). A readability formula that saves time. Journal of Reading, 11, 513–516.
16. Good R. H., Kaminski R. A., (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement.
17. Grossen B., (1997). Thirty years of research: What we know about how children learn to read: A synthesis of research on reading from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Santa Cruz, CA: Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning.
18. Hausfeld S., (1981). Speeded reading and listening comprehension for easy and difficult materials. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 312–319.
19. Headsprout. (n.d.). Retrieved February 5, 2003, from http://www.headsprout.com.
20. Hecker L., Burns L., Elkind J., Elkind K., Katz L., (2002). Benefits of assistive reading software for students with attention disorders. Annals of Dyslexia, 52, 243–272.
21. Higgins E., Raskind M., (1997). The compensatory effectiveness of optical character recognition/speech synthesis on reading comprehension of post-secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 8, 75–87.
22. Kintsch W., van Dijk T. A., (1987). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363–394.
23. Kurzweil Educational Systems. (2000). Kurzweil 3000. Burlington, MA: Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products.
24. Lee Y., Vail C., (2005). Computer-based reading instruction for young children with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 20(1), 5–18.
25. Leong C. K., (1992). Enhancing reading comprehension with text-to-speech (DECtalk) computer system. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4(2), 205–217.
26. Leslie L., Caldwell J., (2001). Qualitative reading inventory (3rd ed). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
27. Lionetti T. M., Cole C. L., (2004). A comparison of the effects of two rates of listening while reading on oral reading fluency and reading comprehension. Education and Treatment of Children, 27(2), 114–129.
28. Marston D. B., (1989). A curriculum-based approach to assessing academic performance: What is it and what does it do? In Shinn M. R., (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 18–78). New York: Guilford.
29. Mather N., Hammill D. D., Allen E. A., Roberts R., (2004). Test of silent word reading fluency. Austin, TX: PRO-ED Inc.
30. Mathis D., (1996). The effect of the Accelerated Reader program on reading comprehension. East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 398555).
31. McCoy K. M., Pany D., (1986). Summary and analysis of oral reading corrective feedback research. The Reading Teacher, 39, 548–554.
32. McMahon M. L., (1983). Development of reading-while-listening skills in the primary grades. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 38–52.
33. Meyer B., Talbot A., Florencio D., (1999). Reading rate and prose retrieval. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(4), 303–329.
34. Montali J., Lewandowski L., (1996). Bimodal reading: Benefits of a talking computer for average and less skilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(3), 271–279.
35. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (Publication No. 00–4769). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
36. Olofsson A., (1992). Synthetic speech and computer aided reading for reading disabled children. Reading and Writing, 4(2), 165–178.
37. Olson R., Foltz G., Wise B., (1986). Reading instruction and remediation with the aid of computer speech. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 18, 93–99.
38. Pany D., McCoy K. M., (1988). Effects of corrective feedback on word accuracy and reading comprehension of readers with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 546–550.
39. Reitsma P., (1988). Reading practice for beginners: Effects of guided reading, reading-while-listening, and independent reading with computer-based speech feedback. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 219–235.
40. Rose T. L., (1981). The effects of two prepractice procedures on oral reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 544–548.
41. Shinn M. R., (Ed.). (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: Guilford Press.
42. Shinn M. R., (1995). Best practices in curriculum-based measurement and its use in a problem solving model. In Thomas A., Grimes J., (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology- III (pp. 547–567). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
43. Skinner C. H., Cooper L., Cole C., (1997). The effects of oral presentation rates on student reading performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30(2), 331–333.
44. Skinner C. H., Logan P., Robinson S., Robinson D., (1997). Demonstration as a reading intervention for exceptional learners. School Psychology Review, 26(3), 437–447.
45. Smith F., (1994). Understanding reading (5th ed.). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
46. Stanovich K. E., (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individualized differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–406.
47. Wechsler D., (2001). Wechsler individual achievement test (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
48. Wise B., Olson R., Anstett M., Andrews L., Terjak M., Schneider V., (1989). Implementing a long-term computerized remedial reading program with synthetic speech feedback: Hardware, software, and real-world issues. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 21, 173–180.
49. Wise B., Ring J., Olson R. K., (2000). Individual differences in gains from computer-assisted remedial reading: More emphasis on phonological analysis or accurate reading in context. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 77, 197–235.
50. Woodcock R. W., McGrew K. S., Mather N., (2001). Woodcock-Johnson tests of achievement (3rd ed.). Chicago: Riverside.