Return to Index Page
Return to Chapter One

Chapter 9: Computer Technology and ABE Reading Instruction
Definition
Rationale
Computer Technology and ABE Reading Instruction: Principles and Trends
Ideas for Computer Technology Instruction from K-12 Research

Chapter 9

Computer Technology and ABE Reading Instruction

Definition

In other sections of this report, computer-assisted instruction (CAI) is discussed within the Instructional Methods and Material category, under Instructional Material. Computer technology is also treated separately, in this section of the report, because of the exceptional promise that many feel technology has for improving the reading of ABE learners (e.g., U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment, 1993).

Computer applications used for instruction can be divided roughly into two categories: supplementary and stand-alone. Supplementary applications are used along with some other form of teacher-based instruction while stand-along applications are used by students with minimal input from a classroom teacher. How is technology used for reading instruction? For the National Reading Panel, this question was answered for K-12 reading instruction by looking at qualifying research studies to determine the ways in which the application of computers to reading instruction occurs.

A total of 21 studies was found, representing experimental manipulations of problems across the entire spectrum of reading instruction. As a first step to further analysis, the problems addressed by these studies were categorized. The largest group of studies (six) included those that studied the addition of speech to computer-presented text. There were two studies that examined the effects of vocabulary instruction, two more that looked at word recognition instruction, and two that investigated comprehension instruction, broadly defined. One study examined spelling, and two studies examined the effects of broad programs on learning to read. These last studies looked at the delivery of reading instruction by comprehensive software that covered many, if not most, elements of reading instruction. (NRP, 2000b, pp. 6-1 -- 6-2)


Rationale

A rationale for the use of computer technology to teach reading is also provided by the NRP:

Until recently, computers did not have all (or even most) of the capabilities that were needed to implement a complete program of reading instruction. A primary lack among these capabilities was the inability to comprehend oral reading and judge its accuracy. Another lack was the inability of computers to accept free-form responses to comprehension questions, leading to reliance solely on recognition tests such as multiple-choice formats. The situation is currently very different, with most new computers capable of speech recognition, as well as a host of multimedia presentation capabilities. Artificial intelligence is beginning to make inroads into software for instruction, and systems for text comprehension are fairly sophisticated, even on home computers.
The development of the Internet and the linking of schools and school computers to it have combined to provide a new interest in computer usage. The kinds of information resources available have provided a stimulus for renewed efforts to deliver instruction of all sorts, including reading, by computer. Coupled with the facts that computers have become much more capable and software has become much more advanced, interest in using the Internet has led to a dramatic new wave of interest in using computers in reading instruction. (p. 6-1)


Computer Technology and ABE Reading Instruction: Principles and Trends


Overall

Question

Does the use of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in ABE programs increase learners' reading achievement?

Principle 17:

In general, computer assisted instruction (CAI) is at least as effective as non-CAI in increasing reading achievement. (Alessi, 1982; Gretes & Green, 1994; Maclay & Askov, 1988; McKane & Greene, 1996; Rachal, 1995)

A descriptive meta-analysis of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) research finds that CAI appears to be as good as traditional ABE instruction at the secondary level, and as good as or better than traditional ABE instruction at the pre-secondary level (Rachal, 1995). These findings were based on an analysis of twenty-one studies that compared the use of CAI for ABE reading instruction with non-CAI approaches. Of the twenty-one studies examined, seven were found to have major methodological flaws (for example, group sizes or tests of statistical significance were not reported). In addition, two of the studies measured language achievement as opposed to reading achievement. The remaining twelve studies yielded sixteen results, or sixteen comparisons between experimental (CAI) and control (non-CAI) groups on measures of reading achievement (two studies had three results, and the rest had one result each). The remaining discussion of the Rachal meta-analysis refers only to these twelve studies and sixteen results.

Five of the experimental results from these studies favored the CAI groups, twelve found no difference between CAI and non-CAI groups, and one favored a non-CAI group. These overall results may be considered positive for two reasons: (a) CAI appears to be at least as good as traditional ABE instruction (only one result favored a non-CAI group), and (b) if these CAI approaches to reading instruction are like CAI programs generally, they may be more efficient, taking less time to accomplish the same results as traditional approaches (Kulik, Kulik & Schwalb, 1986; Kulik & Kulik, 1991; Kulik, 1994).

Only one of the twelve studies from the Rachal meta-analysis discussed above was from a peer-reviewed journal (Diem & Fairweather, 1980). However, four additional experimental studies, not included in the Rachal analysis, were located in peer reviewed journals (Alessi, 1982; Gretes & Green, 1994; Maclay & Askov, 1988; McKane & Greene, 1996). These studies all found positive effects for CAI and thus support the general conclusions drawn from the Rachal analysis.

Instructional Focus

Question

Does the use of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in ABE programs increase learners' achievement in specific aspects of reading (alphabetics, fluency, vocabulary, or comprehension)?

Principle 18:

The use of CAI may lead to increased reading comprehension achievement. (Alessi, 1982; Gretes & Green, 1994; McKane & Greene, 1996; Rachal, 1995)

In the twelve experimental studies used in the Rachal meta-analysis, reading comprehension achievement is the measure used most often. In some cases, it includes combined vocabulary and comprehension measures. In studies where it is clear that reading comprehension is measured (combined with vocabulary in some instances), there were two positive results in favor of CAI instruction and six neutral results that found no difference between CAI and non-CAI instruction. CAI seems to be at least as effective as non-CAI instruction for reading comprehension instruction.

This finding is supported by results from two experimental studies not included in Rachal's analysis (Alessi, 1982; McKane & Greene, 1996). In one, CAI is used to provide practice in word analysis skills and fluency at the letter, syllable, word, phrase, sentence, and paragraph level (McKane & Greene, 1996). This practice leads to an increase in reading comprehension achievement (non-equal-interval GE scores may have been used in this analysis). The computer is used to assess and monitor students' word analysis ability, deciding when mastery is achieved and which skills a student needs to work on. In addition, the computer program measures rate to within tenths of a second in order to monitor fluency.

In the other study (Alessi, 1982), the computer is also used to assess and monitor student progress. Students are taught two comprehension skills, locating information in a text and paraphrasing information. In addition to monitoring student progress, the computer was used to insure mastery of simpler tasks before moving on to more complex ones, to provide corrective feedback, and to provide graphic cues to students (for example, the use of underlining, text boxes, and arrows). Instruction led to improved performance on the two comprehension skills taught: locating information and paraphrasing information.

A newer, interactive CD for teaching reading comprehension to adults uses a multiple-components approach that includes comprehension strategy instruction along with vocabulary instruction and word recognition or fluency practice (Gretes & Green, 1994). This self-paced program includes direct instruction and practice in several specific comprehension strategies (scanning, making inferences, organizing, summarizing, and question-answering) along with direct vocabulary instruction and fluency and word recognition practice using a digitized voice (a natural sounding computer-controlled voice) that allows users to listen to text while reading it.

Trend 29:

The use of CAI may lead to increased word recognition achievement. (Rachal, 1995; Maclay & Askov, 1996)

In studies from the Rachal meta-analysis where it is clear that word recognition is measured, two out of the three results are positive (favoring the CAI group) and the third finds no difference between the CAI and non-CAI groups. All three of these studies involve adults at the pre-secondary level. These results suggest that CAI instruction may increase word analysis ability as well as reading comprehension ability at the pre-secondary level. A study not included in the Rachal analysis also finds positive results for computer-assisted word recognition instruction. In this study the computer is also used to assess and monitor student progress (Maclay & Askov, 1988). Students are taught to recognize high frequency words using pictures and verbal descriptions (through speech synthesis). A significant increase in word recognition achievement was found, compared to a group of students that received no instruction.

Instructional Goals

Trend 30:

CAI may be effective for reading instruction in general functional literacy settings. (Gretes & Green, 1994; Rachal, 1995)

All of the studies except one in Rachal's meta-analysis evaluate the use of CAI for reading instruction in general functional literacy programs as opposed to workplace or family literacy programs. The one exception takes place in a workplace setting. In addition, an experimental study of a computer-based reading comprehension program, not included in the Rachal meta-analysis, focuses on instruction with functional texts dealing with consumer, health, and civics issues (Gretes & Green, 1994).

Trend 31:

CAI may be effective for reading instruction in family literacy settings. (Maclay & Askov, 1988)

Experimental results from a study of CAI instruction that is not included in Rachal's analysis suggests that it is also possible to use CAI to increase word analysis ability within a family literacy setting (Maclay & Askov, 1988). Beginning adult readers (reading below GE 5) in this program increased their word recognition accuracy using a computer software program that taught 1,000 high frequency and functional words.

Instructional Methods and Material


No trends related to instructional methods and material were drawn from the research. Computer assisted instruction uses computer instruction along with some other form of instruction. It may, for example, be used to supplement traditional instruction, or it may be used along with special print-based material. It is sometimes distinguished from computer-based instruction, which uses only computer-based material. Many of the studies reviewed by Rachal use computers along with traditional forms of instruction and print-based material. A few are primarily computer-based, however, including larger, stand-alone systems that contain a complete curriculum.

Functional Reading Level

Trend 32:

CAI may be most effective for adults reading at the pre-secondary level. (Alessi, 1982; Gretes & Green, 1994; Maclay & Askov, 1988; McKane & Greene, 1996; Rachal, 1995)

Only one study was found that directly compares CAI's effectiveness for those at different levels of reading ability (Gretes & Green, 1994). Results from this experimental study suggest that a computer-based program for comprehension instruction is just as effective for adults reading below GE 6 (with GE scores ranging from 4 -- 6) as it is for those reading above (from GE 6.1 -- 9).

Although Rachal's analysis cannot compare those at different reading levels directly, it does break CAI studies into two groups based on the reading level of the adult participants: pre-secondary level and secondary level studies. For pre-secondary ABE students, five results favored CAI, six found no difference, and one favored a non-CAI group. For secondary-level ABE students, all five results found no difference between the groups. This overall result suggests that CAI in reading may be more effective with adults reading at the pre-secondary level. Results from three additional studies with adults at the pre-secondary level also provide indirect (non-experimental) support for this trend (Alessi, 1982; Maclay & Askov, 1988; McKane & Greene, 1996), although none compared effects for pre-secondary and secondary students.



Ideas for Computer Technology Instruction from K-12 Research

Trends from the ABE research suggest that computer-assisted instruction may be as effective as non-computer instruction for increasing reading comprehension, that it may be effective in ABE settings (functional and workplace literacy contexts), and that it may be more effective with adults reading at the pre-secondary level. Trends derived from the relatively small set of K-12 studies reviewed by the NRP provide some support for the ABE trends.

Comment 9:

It is possible to use computer technology effectively for reading instruction.

K-12 Research. Although the NRP (p. 6-2) found that, "It is extremely difficult to make specific instructional conclusions based on the small sample of experimental research available," it also stated that, "Éit is possible to use computer technology for reading instruction. All the studies in the analysis report positive results."

Comment 10:

Speech synthesis may be an effective component of computer-assisted instruction.

K-12 Research. Six of the 21 studies examined by the NRP found that adding speech to the print material presented on computers was an effective CAI practice for reading instruction.

Back to top
Back to Chapter One
Next