Anderson-Inman, L., & Horney, M.A. (2007, January/February/March). Supported eText: Assistive Technology Through Text Transformations. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1), 153–160. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.42.1.8
To gain meaningful access to the curriculum, students with reading difficulties must overcome substantial barriers imposed by the printed materials they are asked to read. Technology can assist students to overcome these challenges by enabling a shift from printed text to electronic text. By electronic text we mean textual material read using a computer or some other electronic device such as a Palm, iPod, or even a LeapPad. Shifting to a computer for presenting text offers immediate advantages to readers, primarily because a computer can be used to modify the way text is viewed and read: font face, size, and color can be changed; text can be read out loud; concepts can be defined and explained; multiple illustrations can appear simultaneously; links can lead to supportive information; and documents can be accessed from different computers in different geographic locations. In short, electronic texts are malleable.
In spite of its inherent possibilities, electronic text by itself is rather limited in its usefulness to readers and learners. In order to really take advantage of its potential as an assistive technology, an electronic reading environment that intelligently transforms text into something that supports comprehension and extends meaningful learning is required. This is accomplished in a variety of ways, including embedded supports (e.g., definitions of unfamiliar terms), multiple modalities (e.g., text that can be read out loud), and links to useful resources (e.g., background information, concept map, notepad)—all of which can transform electronic text so that it is more accessible and supportive to diverse learners. We refer to text that has been altered to increase access and provide support to learners as supported electronic text or supported eText.
From multiple research and development projects that focused on investigating the nature and impact of supportive electronic text, Anderson-Inman and Horney developed typology that talked about the specific types of resources that can be used to transform electronic text. The work publisized eight types of supportive resources that enable students to read texts easier and more educational. They focus on what function the supportive resource encorporates in the reading process. This adds features that enhance the reading process and help develop heightened comprehension.A strength is that if teachers design a reading environment that is effective and can be used for all students not just an accommodation for a few. A weakness is that multimedia can have a negative impact if not done correctly because not all eText supports are supportive for all learners. As with some of the other research I've done there is not a "one size fits all", the teacher should learn the programs and assess and try different strategies with each student.
They found that any type of eText support can be implemented in multiple ways, using different types of media. For students who have learning disabilities the translational resources may simplified text or synonyms. Students who are deaf, translation can be in the form of video with an American Sign Language interpreter. There is new technology coming to the for front each day so the virtual text will change yearly as the electronic form changes.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Article # 10 Assistive Technology in the Reading Clinic: Its Emerging Potential
McKenna, M.C., & Walpole, S. (2007, January/February/March). Assistive Technology in the Reading Clinic: Its Emerging Potential. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1), 140–145. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.42.1.6
In the experience, traditional reading clinics, whose mission it is to serve struggling readers through comprehensive, individually administered assessment and individually tailored one-on-one instruction, have been slow to embrace the potential of technology. Instead, technology applications in literacy instruction appear to have been far more commonly implemented in special education settings and far more commonly investigated by literacy researchers whose agendas do not focus on struggling readers. They believe that this situation is unfortunate. Developments within assistive technology (AT), not to mention policy-driven reality, suggest that clinical practice be reconsidered in light of emerging applications if clinics are to serve struggling readers optimally and if, ultimately, clinics are to thrive in a digital era.
The study has a belief in the utility of the reading clinic as an essential context for teacher preparation and as a means of serving struggling children. Clinics remain a vehicle useful in reaching nuanced judgments about reading difficulties, offering detailed guidance to practitioners, and pioneering new methods of assessment. The research suspected that AT holds exceptional promise for achieving these ends. Our purpose here is first to sharpen the definition of AT in clinical settings, to describe how theory and available research support its use in clinics, to link AT in clinics to AT in schools, and finally to identify questions for future inquiry.
The problem is that traditional reading clinics served struggling readers through comprehensive, individually designed for one-on-one instruction, and have been slow to believe in the potential of technology. There has been far more research on technology for learning disabillities than for struggling readers. Assistive technology can help the students read print and any print is beneficial for the struggling readers. A weakness of the research is that it is limited and sometimes conflicting. For exampole in text-to-speech technologies it may be helpful for comorehension for below average and reading disabled, but lacks the strength to help students with ADD. Sometimes speech recognition can suffer from inaccurate word matches and students with severe spelling disorders hasve problems with spell checkers. The strengths of the research is that it shows the potential for readers to compensate for specific reading deficits by using AT along with instructional interventions.
The implications of the findings are that many readers can benefit from Assistive Technology, not only students with learning disabilities. Teachers can impliment the AT with help from additional school personal who are better able to monitor the student. The child's individual classroom sets the format for the type if instruction that may happen, and create expectations that are attainable.
In the experience, traditional reading clinics, whose mission it is to serve struggling readers through comprehensive, individually administered assessment and individually tailored one-on-one instruction, have been slow to embrace the potential of technology. Instead, technology applications in literacy instruction appear to have been far more commonly implemented in special education settings and far more commonly investigated by literacy researchers whose agendas do not focus on struggling readers. They believe that this situation is unfortunate. Developments within assistive technology (AT), not to mention policy-driven reality, suggest that clinical practice be reconsidered in light of emerging applications if clinics are to serve struggling readers optimally and if, ultimately, clinics are to thrive in a digital era.
The study has a belief in the utility of the reading clinic as an essential context for teacher preparation and as a means of serving struggling children. Clinics remain a vehicle useful in reaching nuanced judgments about reading difficulties, offering detailed guidance to practitioners, and pioneering new methods of assessment. The research suspected that AT holds exceptional promise for achieving these ends. Our purpose here is first to sharpen the definition of AT in clinical settings, to describe how theory and available research support its use in clinics, to link AT in clinics to AT in schools, and finally to identify questions for future inquiry.
The problem is that traditional reading clinics served struggling readers through comprehensive, individually designed for one-on-one instruction, and have been slow to believe in the potential of technology. There has been far more research on technology for learning disabillities than for struggling readers. Assistive technology can help the students read print and any print is beneficial for the struggling readers. A weakness of the research is that it is limited and sometimes conflicting. For exampole in text-to-speech technologies it may be helpful for comorehension for below average and reading disabled, but lacks the strength to help students with ADD. Sometimes speech recognition can suffer from inaccurate word matches and students with severe spelling disorders hasve problems with spell checkers. The strengths of the research is that it shows the potential for readers to compensate for specific reading deficits by using AT along with instructional interventions.
The implications of the findings are that many readers can benefit from Assistive Technology, not only students with learning disabilities. Teachers can impliment the AT with help from additional school personal who are better able to monitor the student. The child's individual classroom sets the format for the type if instruction that may happen, and create expectations that are attainable.
Article #9 Technology-Enhanced Reading Performance:Defining a Research Agenda
Edyburn, D.L. (2007, January/February/March). Technology-Enhanced Reading Performance: Defining a Research Agenda. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1), 146–152. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.42.1.7
In each of the scenarios presented, it is important to consider the event that stimulates an intervention and associated support services. Such issues are clear in the first example. However, in the second scenario, there is no single event that triggers action. Therefore, how long do we continue to provide reading instruction when a child is clearly not benefiting from it? This point is not meant to suggest that we give up teaching a child to read. Rather, at what point do we intervene with compensatory strategies, including assistive technology, to enable students to bypass, for example, the decoding aspects of reading that they have not been able to master in order to engage in the higher order processes of extracting meaning from text?
A fundamental problem for many struggling readers, their parents, and their teachers is that there are few benchmarks to guide decision making about using assistive technology when the nature of a disability is cognitive rather than physical. Given that the basic processes associated with reading and comprehending are cognitive, the field has been caught unprepared to address issues of how technology compensates for cognitive impairments (Edyburn, 2000, 2003a). Several factors may explain the lack of attention devoted to assistive technology and reading and the minimal knowledge base that has accumulated to date.
Instructional methods often cause an achievement gap for underperforming students;Black students, students with disabilities, students living in poverty, and students whose first language is not English. There is a definite line between grade-level achievement and performance. The weakness of assistive technology is that there still needs to be more research on the underdeveloped range of technological text-to-speech tools. A strength is that federal policies are starting to realize that through using technology as an intervention for struggling readers is a way to differentiate instruction.
The findings were that academic performance that is achieved without outside help is more esteemed than performance that is contingent on tools or resources. there is a bias against using technology for struggling readers that is called, "naked independence". The conception is students using outside sources aren't performing as well. They argue that these students may become dependant on the machines and will not be able to test well on state tests. Although the use if technology does challenge the theory of working without technology the students are able to perform well and decrease the learning gap.
In each of the scenarios presented, it is important to consider the event that stimulates an intervention and associated support services. Such issues are clear in the first example. However, in the second scenario, there is no single event that triggers action. Therefore, how long do we continue to provide reading instruction when a child is clearly not benefiting from it? This point is not meant to suggest that we give up teaching a child to read. Rather, at what point do we intervene with compensatory strategies, including assistive technology, to enable students to bypass, for example, the decoding aspects of reading that they have not been able to master in order to engage in the higher order processes of extracting meaning from text?
A fundamental problem for many struggling readers, their parents, and their teachers is that there are few benchmarks to guide decision making about using assistive technology when the nature of a disability is cognitive rather than physical. Given that the basic processes associated with reading and comprehending are cognitive, the field has been caught unprepared to address issues of how technology compensates for cognitive impairments (Edyburn, 2000, 2003a). Several factors may explain the lack of attention devoted to assistive technology and reading and the minimal knowledge base that has accumulated to date.
Instructional methods often cause an achievement gap for underperforming students;Black students, students with disabilities, students living in poverty, and students whose first language is not English. There is a definite line between grade-level achievement and performance. The weakness of assistive technology is that there still needs to be more research on the underdeveloped range of technological text-to-speech tools. A strength is that federal policies are starting to realize that through using technology as an intervention for struggling readers is a way to differentiate instruction.
The findings were that academic performance that is achieved without outside help is more esteemed than performance that is contingent on tools or resources. there is a bias against using technology for struggling readers that is called, "naked independence". The conception is students using outside sources aren't performing as well. They argue that these students may become dependant on the machines and will not be able to test well on state tests. Although the use if technology does challenge the theory of working without technology the students are able to perform well and decrease the learning gap.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
