2+Literature+Review

Literature Review  Many research studies have been conducted over the years in the area of reading. The research that has been conducted has focused on how children learn to read and why some children learn to read faster than others. Levy (2009) cites many studies that imply that educators need to understand how children interact with the digital world around them so that they can use those tools in the classroom. Most children are exposed to technology through games at a very early age. Hertzog and Klein (2005) suggest that today’s generations of students are now referred to as “digital natives” whereas their parents are referred to as “digital immigrants”. These students can be home and still carry on conversations with anyone anywhere in the world. This is an important fact to consider as a kindergarten teacher looks to incorporate technological tools or software seamlessly into his/her lesson plans. Teachers seem to struggle with how to integrate technology seamlessly into the curriculum. There are many tools, software and Web 2.0 applications that can assist teachers with the integration process. First, teachers need to decide what application or tool would benefit their student population, what prior experience would their student need, and what tools are needed by the teacher. “One particularly promising approach to implementing classroom technology for young learners is a “toolkit” approach, in which a collection of appropriate types of technology (both hardware and software) is specifically selected to enhance student performance” as cited by Hourcade, et al. (2010). These tools can be digital cameras, camcorders, SMART Boards, printers, software applications, and unlimited web 2.0 applications. Teachers do not necessarily need to construct a “toolkit” to implement technology. They or their students can create their own electronic books using programs such as Adobe Reader, Microsoft PowerPoint or Reader (Larson, 2008). Skouge, Rao, and Boisvert (2007) suggest that all an educator needs to implement technology is “to take risks to learn new skills, investing evolving technologies, and enter into partnerships with youth who are technology savvy and eager to serve.” Wood, Littleton, and Chera (2005) stated that “an alternative approach to supporting literacy development has focused on the potential use of computer software to facilitate learning in the classroom. “ Software programs generally address many components needed to master a given skill. Web 2.0 is normally associated with web applications that facilitate interactive [|information sharing]  and [|collaboration]  on the [|World Wide Web] . The Web 2.0 applications that I found would be hard for kindergarten students without prior computer experience. The world wide web also has search engines such as Yahoo!kids or askkids.com. However, these are generally targeted to older children (Wang, Kinzie, McGuire, and Pan, 2009). So, I decided to turn my attention to software applications that seem to have more research based data to make a more informed decision. Software applications such as computer-assisted programs can provide systematic exercises in phonological awareness and letter sound correspondence (Macaruso and Walker, 2008) that I feel will benefit kindergarten students in the beginning stages of reading. Software applications that are used for kindergarten students are normally in a game type format. Compton-Lilly’s article // __What Can Video Games Teach Us About Reading__ //brings up some interesting points. First of all, games allow children to make mistakes in a “risk-free” environment. The author cites the example of “Round Robin” reading and the uneasiness that many children feel or have felt when they could not read their upcoming part of the passage. Another point the author cites is that games allow children to create identities and encourage identity work. Through games, children can identify what type of student they are and improve or refine that student. Games give students many opportunities to practice and refine their skills. However, if the player continues to provide an incorrect answer a well designed game will provide instruction for that student on that particular skill. I found this information very beneficial for my research. I believe that based on the age of my children and the computer skills that they possess, focusing on software applications that provide a game like experience would be the best alternative for my class. Parette, Hourcade, Dinelli, and Boeckmann (2009) wrote an article about the // Clicker 5 // program. This article addresses the problems of emergent literacy in young learners that may have difficulties or disabilities. Children who interact with text and pictures develop the foundation for early reading skills. In the article, the authors address ways the Clicker 5 software program can help children with emergent reading skills. The Clicker 5 is a grid writing program. Grid writing is a software application that provides students with a group of words or pictures that will help to make writing choices simpler. It addresses phonemic awareness, word recognition, concepts about print, alphabetic principle, and comprehension. Studies show there are a small but increasing amount of evidence that computer based technology can enhance learning in young learners that may have a disability or difficulties with reading. The Clicker 5 program can be modified to use the teacher’s voice or prerecorded text, sentences, words, or sounds. Clicker 5 is well used in England and is gaining popularity in the United States. The // Clicker 5 // program was mentioned in other articles while I was completing my article review. Based on the recommendation made by other articles, I feel that this program could possibly meet the needs of our kindergarten student population at my elementary school. I am currently in the process of obtaining permission from my school administration, technology department and the Clicker 5 software program company to conduct the study at Rosemont Elementary. Larson (2008) quotes the International Reading Association by stating that “educators have a responsibility to effectively integrate technologies and new literacies into the current language curriculum to prepare students for the literacy futures they deserve.” Many teachers possess personal technology skills. However, they struggle with how to implement these skills seamlessly into the classroom. This research should help provide the kindergarten teachers at my school another tool for implementing technology into the curriculum and assisting their students with learning to read.

Brown, J. (2006). Mobile assessment: Working smarter, not harder. //T.H.E. Journal//, 33(13), 32-35. Retrieved from ERIC database.
 * Articles ** <span style="display: block; font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 130%;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 12pt;">This article discusses Mobile Classroom Assessment (mCLASS). Brown (2006) list many examples of school systems that have found it an effective way to assess the reading skills of their students. The Mobile Classroom Assessment provides immediate feedback for the teacher. It can also be use by principals in assessing teachers. The article gives readers of an example of how teachers can receive immediate feedback from their principal about their instruction methods. Therefore, teachers have time to make adjustments and improve their teaching skills. The article offered many websites so the reader can follow-up with the many different companies that offer Mobile Classroom Assessment. Brown warns her readers that adequate professional development is a must for successful implementation of the technology. She also states that you choose a Mobile assessment tool that is suitable for you school or county. Make sure that the tools that you select are in sync with your curriculum and the technological abilities of your teachers. <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 12pt;">The article was written by Justine Brown. Her description tells the reader that she specializes in writing about technology, education and government topics. It does not list her educational background. Brown’s article was a little closer to the topic that I am researching. However, I was looking for ways to implement technology while teaching reading. Assessment is a very important part of monitoring reading, so I will be able to use this article for my research study.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 12pt;">Coleman, M., & Heller, K..(2010). The use of repeated reading with computer modeling to promote reading fluency with students who have physical disabilities. //Journal of Special Education Technology//, 25(1), 29-41. Retrieved from ProQuest Education Journals.

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 12pt;">Coleman and Heller conducted a study by focusing on students that qualified for orthopedic impaired but did not have any articulation or voice disorders. These students ranged in age from 9 to 12 years of age and were being served in a self contained classroom. Reading instruction took place with materials being placed on the table or the student’s wheelchair tray. The computer modeling that took place was using the researcher’s laptop computer. The researcher used Kurzweil 3000 software. Kurzweil 3000 includes many features such as test to speech, a talking word processor, talking dictionary, spell checker, and many more features that help student to organize materials they may need to study. To begin the study, the researcher calculated the student’s reading level and fluency. The student then would read a passage and the researcher recorded errors in fluency and checked comprehension at the end of the passage. The student then read the passage along with the computer. The researcher was there to keep the student focused. After the computer modeling was completed, the student would then read the passage again and the fluency rate information was once again recorded. The results of this study showed improvements in reading fluency and accuracy. Comprehension results varied depending on the student.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Hertzog, N., & Klein, M. (2005). Beyond gaming: A technology explosion in early childhood classrooms. //Gifted Child Today//, 28, (3), 24-31. Retrieved from [|http://www.prufrock.com]

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">In this article the authors investigate the problem of the effectiveness of integrating computers in the classroom. They are looking for the impacts of the social and emotional development, cognitive development and learning, creativity, language and reading, and math. They pointed out that teachers are considered the computer immigrants and the children are digital natives. It is important that we use computers to encourage creativity and discovery. If we use computers for recall and memorization, then computers are not any better than the pencil we use to write a report. They did their research at the University Primary School in Illinois. They observed classrooms that promote observation, discovery, and peer assistance. The teacher was there as a guide. The researchers witnessed instances where students were asking other students how to print or to change the background of the picture they were working on. It is important that students felt free to collaborate but capture their own creativity in demonstrating the knowledge they had acquired through their discoveries. I would love to visit this classroom or one very similar to see how the day is structured. I would also love to see the Illinois state standards and compare them with Georgia’s state standards.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 12pt;">Hourcade, J., Parette, H., Boeckmann, N., & Blum, C. (2010). "Handy manny" and the emergent literacy technology toolkit. //Early Childhood Education Journal//, 37(6), 483-491. Retrieved from []

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 12pt;">The authors of this article designed a toolkit that contains hardware and software for early childhood educators. These tools are designed to attack emergent literacy skills. The authors created this concept based the popularity of home improvement television shows and the Handy Mandy cartoon based the character Handy Manny and the tools that he uses on the show. In the article, the authors warn that the tools are only useful if the teacher has a very deep understanding of each tool. Just as Handy Manny or carpenter has developed proficient skills with each of their tools throughout the years, so will teachers if they practice with the tools on a regular basis. Some of the basic tools included a LCD monitor, digital camera, Microsoft PowerPoint, Clicker 5, and other communication software programs. Hourcade, Parette, Boeckmann, and Blum (2010) stated that the educator that implements the technology toolkit must be able to measure the impact or educational value for the young learner.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Judge, S., Puckett, K., & Bell, S. (2006). Closing the digital divide: Update from the early childhood longitudinal study. //Journal of Educational Research//, 100(1), 52-60. Retrieved from []

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">The authors focused their study on the progress made toward equitable technology access and use over a group of students’ first 4 years of school. This study had 8,283 participants that were public school children who attended kindergarten, 1st, and 3rd grades. The authors collected data through parent, teacher, and administrator interviews. This study was considered an extension of a previous study conducted by the researchers of this article. They were focused on answering these questions: Does technology access differ for children attending high-poverty and low poverty schools? Does computer use differ for children attending high-poverty and low-poverty schools? and Are there differences in frequency of computer use according to academic achievement and school-poverty concentrations? <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">The researchers used reading tests that measured phonemic awareness, comprehension and many other sub tests. The math test measured number sense, measurement, geometry, spatial awareness, statistics, probability, and many more sub-tests. The results of the study show that technology in the classroom is increasing. However, just because children are using the computers there was no significant increase in academic achievement. Therefore, teachers need to focus on how the technology is being used and evaluate the effectiveness of the software they plan to use. Another great point is that technology cannot replace face to face instruction at this age. However, it can enhance instruction if it is integrated properly.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Levy, R., (2009). "You have to understand words...but not read them": Young children becoming readers in a digital age. //Journal of Research in Reading//, 32(1), 75-91. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2008.01382.x

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">In the article by Rachel Levy (2009), she conducts a quantitative research projects with 12 children. The children ages ranged from three to six years of age. This study was designed to report the findings of how children developed strategies to read and understand digital texts within a variety of different contexts. She chose certain criteria to help determine what children would participate in the study. The researcher used observations and interviews to gather information. The results of the study strongly suggested that students can make sense of print in situations that are meaningful, motivating, and free from grading standards. However as the study progressed, the students came to understand that reading books and reading digital text were very similar. Teachers need to take into consideration that children enter classrooms as frequent users of digital technology. We need to make sure our grading policies and motivational strategies encourage the technology advances in the classroom.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Macaruso, P., & Walker, A. (2008). The efficacy of computer-assisted instruction for advancing literacy skills in kindergarten children. //Reading Psychology//, 29(3), 266-287. doi:10.1080/02702710801982019

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">In this study by Macaruso and Walker, they used both qualitative and quantative data to determine their findings. The purpose of the study was to determine the benefits of a phonics based computer assisted instruction program for kindergarten students. They conducted their research with six kindergarten classrooms. In the beginning, the study started with ninety four students. However, based on the requirements set by the researcher the findings of the study only had 48 participants. In this study, researchers found that no significant difference was found between the control and the treatment. However, the researchers focused on the lowest four students in each group there was a significant difference. Therefore, the Early Reading Lexia computer assisted instructional program did benefit students that scored the lowest on the DIBELS pretest. Macaruso et al. states that according to Cassady and Smith (2005), benefits of using software programs hinge on whether the programs are properly integrated into classroom instruction. This is the most important fact of all technology integration.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Mechling, L., Gast, D., & Thompson, K.. (2008) Comparison of the effects of smart board technology and flash card instruction on sight word recognition and observational learning. //Journal of Special Education Technology//, 23(1), 34-46 Retrieved from [[ [] ﻿rchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1287167230&clientId=30336This study was conducted to measure the effectiveness of the SMART Board versus the traditional flash card instruction on sight word recognition. This was a case study involving two females and one male with moderate intellectual disabilities. Functional sight words were chosen for this study. Flash card instruction and SMART Board group instruction was provided the same day. One session was held in the morning and one other session in the afternoon. This was done two to three times per week. The results showed that both SMART board and flash card instruction were effective in teaching sight words. However, when the words were presented on a large screen it was a more effective way to promote observational learning of other students’ information for the participants in the study. This study does raise the question on whether or not technology-based strategies for delivering instruction are better than the more traditional methods. The researchers believe that the results were promising, but the results varied in the different students in the study. I would like to see this study conducted in my school. I would love to see the results. I believe a larger population of students would yield better results.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Parette, H., Hourcade, J., Dinelli, J., & Boeckmann, N. (2009). Using "Clicker 5" to enhance emergent literacy in young learners. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36(4), 355-363. Retrieved from []

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">This was a great article that addresses the problems of emergent literacy in young learners that may have difficulties or disabilities. Children who interact with text and pictures develop the foundation for early reading skills. This article addresses ways the Clicker 5 software program can help children with emergent reading skills. The Clicker 5 is a grid writing program. Grid writing is a software application that provides students with a group of words or pictures that will help to make writing choices simpler. It addresses phonemic awareness, word recognition, concepts about print, alphabetic principle, and comprehension. Studies show there are a small but increasing amount of evidence that computer based technology can enhance learning in young learners that may have a disability or difficulties with reading. The Clicker 5 program can be modified to use the teacher’s voice or prerecorded text, sentences, words, or sounds. Clicker 5 is well used in England and is gaining popularity in the United States. This is the type of program that I wouldn’t mind trying out for my kindergarten students. We see so many students come to school without those early learning experiences and I think that this would be beneficial on what I have read so far. I would like to study this software a little more and see if I could acquire a copy to test in my classroom.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 12pt;">Putman, Michael S..(2005) Computer-based reading technology in the classroom: The affective influence of performance contingent point accumulation on 4th grade students.Reading Research and Instruction, 45(1), 19-38. Retrieved from [[ [] rchMode=2&sid=2&Fmt=4&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1287156246&clientId=30336S. Michael Putman chose to study the effects of the Accelerated Reader program to the level of self efficacy and value of reading for the students that are included in this study. Previous research has shown that to promote efficacious behaviors students need activities that are challenging but allow them to succeed. The shocking data that I read was Putman quoted Dweck (20002) by stating that around age of eight there is an increased focus on academic work. I have an eight year old and find that hard to believe. He would rather play with his friends than do homework or read an AR book. Putman conducted his study with 68 fourth graders at a school very similar to the current population of the school where I currently teach. He measured their reading efficacy and value of reading with the Motivation to Read Profile. The survey contains twenty questions that are measured on a four point scale. The study was conduct over a fourteen week period of time. The results that followed were as follows: Group B showed the highest initial efficacy and value of reading. However, after the study was concluded they showed the greatest decline in self-efficacy. Group A, which was group with the highest points in the beginning of the study, showed a decline in self efficacy and the value of reading but it was not a significant amount. The author states that this is due to fact that they value reading, before the study started. Group C, which was the group with the lowest initial points, maintained a very low point gain. Therefore, the author states that they are not motivated by points or prizes. So, I feel that this is not an effective program for these students.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 12pt;">Rasinski, T., Rupley, W., & Nichols, W. (2008). Two essential ingredients: Phonics and fluency getting to know each other. Reading Teacher, 62(3), 257-260. doi: 10.1598/RT.62.3.7 This is an article that I found while looking for integrating technology in reading. The article talks about the importance of teaching phonics and fluency together. <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 12pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">Rasinski, Rupley, and Nichols (2008) point out that rhyming poetry is a way to address this more effectively. They suggest that a reader that can read a rime in a word should be able to apply that skill to other words that contain that rime. The authors suggest that a teacher present to their class a rime. The rime could be –am, for example. The teacher along with his or her students will brainstorm and create a list of words that contain that rime. The teacher will then identify a poem that contains the –am rime. The teacher and the students will read and recite this poem many times throughout the day. The teacher reviews the words and the poem many times throughout the weed. In fact, the words may be added to the classroom word wall. Through constant repetition and review the students should be fluent with the words at the end of the study of the rhyming words.This article was written by Rasinski that teaches at Kent State University, Rupley that teaches at Texas A&M University, and Nichols that teaches at Western Carolina University. The authors made many references to other articles, but do not offer a study that shows results of their recommendations. They basically wrote this article as a teaching tip. I was very disappointed in reading this article. The article did not give me any suggestions of how to integrate technology into reading. I will have to be careful and maybe refine my searches in the future. This information might not be what I was looking for in my research; I will be able to take the information provided and test it in my classroom.

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 12pt;">Skouge, J., Rao, K., & Boisvert, P. (2007). Promoting Early Literacy for Diverse Learners Using Audio and Video Technology. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(1), 5-11. Retrieved from []

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 12pt;">This article was written to demonstrate how audio and video technology can promote reading in the classroom. It demonstrates how education is slowly moving from the industrial age to the digital age. The authors describe the pressure that teachers are under to teach children to read. In fact, teachers are expected to provide reading instruction from day one of school. However, children and parents are busier than ever and often do not make the time to read for pleasure. This article describes ways that the teachers can increase that enthusiasm for their students. It talks about the shared reading experience. The teacher can share a story that is recorded on a CD during circle time. The teacher can then place the CD and the book in the listening center for the students to enjoy over and over again. Another option could be that the child could take the book home to share with their parents. By making the CD, the story can be enjoyed while on the road. The article also covers ways to enhance the reading enjoyment for deaf and blind students. The methods are very similar with only making accommodations using sign language or Braille.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Wang, F., Kinzie, M., McGuire, P., & Pan, E. (2010). Applying technology to inquiry-based learning in early childhood education. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(5), 381- 389. Retrieved from []

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">The authors of this article discuss inquiry-based activities and their increased potential when these activities are integrated with technology. This article was written for the sole purpose of providing educators resources to help guide them in designing and integrating technology into their classroom. It provides many examples of different types of programs and how they can benefit the classroom. Blumfield et al. 1991; Hannafin et al. 1999; Hoffman and Ritchie 1997; Quintana et al. 2004; Reiser 2004, all suggest that instructional technologies should be used in early childhood inquiry education to (a) enrich and provide structure for problem contexts, (b) facilitate resource utilization, and (c) support cognitive and metacognitive processes. This article also makes repeated claims that technology can be used to increase student motivation, help children become more aware of their though processes, and support high order thinking skills. However, the authors warn that technology cannot stand alone. Research shows that that students use technology more efficiently when they supported by their teachers. Therefore, teacher training, attitudes, and confidence effects how well technology is integrated in the classroom and the attitudes of their students.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-align: center;">

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">Wood, C., Littleton, K., & Chera, P. (2005). Beginning readers' use of talking books: Styles of working. Literacy, 39(3), 135-141. Retrieved from [|http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 9345.2005.00413] .x

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">The researchers in this study used talking books or ebooks to study the working styles of young children. The study was focused on thirty-two students in Buckinghamshire, England. The average age was around 4.9. Before the study began, the students were given four standardized tests. These students were categorized as high attaining or low attaining based on the results of the tests. The first four pairs were high attaining students based on word reading and rhyme awareness. The other students were paired based on high attaining to low high attaining students. Through visit from the researchers, the students were taught how to use the //MacIntosh Powerbook and// the features of the ebook demonstrated for them. Then the researchers videotaped the joint interactions of the students as they used the //Powerbooks//. Through observations, the researchers conclude that boys are less likely to help their partners while working together. Also, young children see adults as the authority of all knowledge. This seems to be a barrier of future joint use of educational software.