Technology Applications for Students with Literacy Problems: A Critical Review
Abstract
This review covers research published in the past 15 years on the use of technology to teach or support literacy among students with mild disabilities. First, the review addresses research on computer-assisted instruction and on synthesized speech feedback to improve phonemic awareness and decoding skills. Second, it reviews work on the use of electronic texts to enhance comprehension by compensating for reading difficulties. Finally, it considers research on a variety of tools to support writing. The discussion addresses both substantive and methodological issues.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
For children with dyslexia, text-to-speech tools might help compensate for their decoding difficulties, favouring better access to higher levels of reading comprehension.
“experts suggest that, for these children, text-to-speech tools might help compensate for their decoding difficulties, favouring better access to higher levels of reading comprehension (Elkind et al., 1993;Lopresti et al., 2004;MacArthur et al., 2001;Wood et al., 2018).”
From Text‐to‐speech applications to reduce mind wandering in students with dyslexia (2022) · cites this paper as MacArthur et al., 2001
Cites
Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media
Clark, R. E. (1983) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543053004445 · Cited by 2,715 · see citing works
Bridging the Research-to-Practice Gap
Carnine, D. (1997) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440299706300406 · Cited by 384 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wood, S. G., Moxley, J. H., Tighe, E. L., & Wagner, R. K. (2018) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/0022219416688170 · Cited by 195 · see citing works
Perelmutter, B., McGregor, K. K., & Gordon, K. R. (2017) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.005 · Cited by 172 · see citing works
Reflections on Research on Writing and Technology for Struggling Writers
MacArthur, C. A. (2009) · Learning Disabilities Research & Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2009.00283.x · Cited by 156 · see citing works
Self-citationText‐to‐speech applications to reduce mind wandering in students with dyslexia
Bonifacci, P., Colombini, E., Marzocchi, M., Tobia, V., & Desideri, L. (2022) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12624 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
- Authors
- MacArthur, C. A., Ferretti, R. P., Okolo, C. M., & Cavalier, A. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Delaware (US)
- Venue
- The Elementary School Journal
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2001-01
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 273-301
- ISSN
- 0013-5984 (ISSN-L)
- 1554-8279
- OpenAlex
- W2087257613
- Cited by
- 191
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 8.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Elementary School Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Keywords
- technology-assisted instruction, literacy education, mildly handicapped students, phonemic awareness, decoding, digital texts, reading comprehension, writing support tools, reading difficulties, primary education
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
