Technology Infusion in Success for All: Reading Outcomes for First Graders

This article evaluates 2 technology applications for teaching beginning reading. One, embedded multimedia, involves brief phonics and vocabulary videos threaded through teachers' lessons. The other, computer-assisted tutoring, helps tutors with planning, instruction, and assessment. An experiment in 2 high-poverty, high-minority Success for All schools compared 159 first-grade students randomly assigned to technology or nontechnology conditions in a year-long study. Across all students, significant differences favored the technology condition on Woodcock Letter-Word Identification and Word Attack and GORT Fluency and Total scales (median ES = +0.28). Tutored first graders who received both technology enhancements scored significantly higher on the GORT, Woodcock Letter-Word and Word Attack, Fluency, Comprehension, and Total scales (median ES = +0.53). Nontutored students who experienced just the embedded multimedia scored significantly higher than nontutored control students on Woodcock Letter-Word Identification and GORT Total scores, and marginally higher on GORT Fluency (median ES = +0.27). Results suggested that video and computer technology embedded in instruction may accelerate children's learning.

[1]  Geoffrey D. Borman,et al.  Final Reading Outcomes of the National Randomized Field Trial of Success for All , 2007 .

[2]  Stephen K. Reed,et al.  Cognitive Architectures for Multimedia Learning , 2006 .

[3]  Peter Grogono,et al.  Modelling techniques for tutoring systems , 1993 .

[4]  R. Olson,et al.  Training phonological awareness with and without explicit attention to articulation. , 1999, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[5]  Barbara A. Wasik,et al.  Preventing Early Reading Failure with One-to-One Tutoring: A Review of Five Programs. , 1993 .

[6]  Marilyn Jager Adams,et al.  Beginning To Read: Thinking and Learning about Print. , 1991 .

[7]  Yu-Hui Ching,et al.  Effects of Animation on Multi-Level Learning Outcomes for Learners with Different Characteristics: A Meta-Analytic Assessment and Interpretation , 2006 .

[8]  Susan E. Newman,et al.  Cognitive Apprenticeship: Teaching the Craft of Reading, Writing, and Mathematics. Technical Report No. 403. , 1987 .

[9]  Robert E. Slavin,et al.  One Million Children: Success for All , 2000 .

[10]  Gloria Gery.  Achieving Performance and Learning through Performance-Centered Systems , 2002 .

[11]  Lawrence L. Smith,et al.  INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SOFTWARE: THE EFFECTS ON YOUNG CHILDREN'S READING ACHIEVEMENT , 1996 .

[12]  Thomas D. Snyder,et al.  Digest of Education Statistics , 1994 .

[13]  A. Paivio,et al.  Dual coding theory and education , 1991 .

[14]  Geoffrey D. Borman,et al.  The National Randomized Field Trial of Success for All: Second-Year Outcomes , 2005 .

[15]  E J Thompson,et al.  The Essential Handbook of Memory Disorders for Clinicians. Edited by A. D. Baddeley, M. D. Kopelman and B. A. Wilson. (Pp. 392; 26.99; ISBN 0-470-09141-X pb.) John Wiley and Sons Ltd: Chichester. 2004 , 2005 .

[16]  Henry Jay Becker,et al.  Computer Use by Teachers: Are Cuban's Predictions Correct? , 2001 .

[17]  Philip C. Abrami,et al.  Developing a Computer-Assisted Tutoring Program to Help Children at Risk Learn to Read , 2001 .

[18]  R. Kozma.  Learning with Media , 1991 .

[19]  Philip C. Abrami,et al.  Computer-Assisted Tutoring in Success for All: Reading Outcomes for First Graders , 2008 .

[20]  Robert E. Slavin,et al.  Enhancing Success for All for Hispanic Students: Effects on Beginning Reading Achievement , 2005 .

[21]  Robert E. Slavin,et al.  Achievement effects of embedded multimedia in a Success for All reading program , 2005 .

[22]  Alfred Bork,et al.  Multimedia in Learning , 2001 .

[23]  Howard T. Everson,et al.  Modeling the student in intelligent tutoring sytems: The promise of a new psychometrics , 1995 .

[24]  L. Corno,et al.  Teacher Innovations in Self-Regulated Learning , 2000 .

[25]  R. Mayer,et al.  Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning , 2003 .

[26]  H. Becker.  How Are Teachers Using Computers in Instruction? , 2001 .

[27]  Benoit Danis,et al.  Alphie’s Alley Early Literacy Tutoring Software , 2005 .

[28]  Ron Dumont,et al.  Gray Oral Reading Tests–Fourth Edition , 2008 .

[29]  Kelli C. Foster.  Computer Administered Instruction in Phonological Awareness: Evaluation of the DaisyQuest Program. , 1994 .

[30]  A. Collins.  The Psychology of Memory. , 2001 .

[31]  Geoffrey D. Borman,et al.  Comprehensive School Reform and Achievement: A Meta-Analysis , 2003 .

[32]  David Mioduser,et al.  The learning value of computer-based instruction of early reading skills , 2001, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[33]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design: Recent Developments , 2003 .

[34]  S M Dorman,et al.  Are teachers using computers for instruction? , 2001, The Journal of school health.

[35]  Samuel Richmond.  Report to the President on the Use of Technology to Strengthen K-12 Education in the United States , 1998 .

[36]  Mabel L. Rice,et al.  Words from Sesame Street : learning vocabulary while viewing , 1990 .

[37]  S. Ball,et al.  The Second Year of Sesame Street: A Continuing Evaluation. Volume 1. , 1971 .

[38]  Barbara J. Wendling,et al.  Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement. , 2009 .

[39]  Joseph K. Torgesen,et al.  Prevention and Remediation of Severe Reading Disabilities: Keeping the End in Mind , 1997, Components of Effective Reading Intervention.

[40]  Charles R. Greenwood,et al.  Effects of Viewing the Television Program Between the Lions on the Emergent Literacy Skills of Young Children , 2004 .

[41]  J. Torgesen,et al.  Computers as Aids in the Prevention and Remediation of Reading Disabilities , 1995 .