Population / 5 males and 7 females from grades 2-5 who were identified by their teachers as being below grade level in reading. Four were receiving special education for learning disabilities.
setting / Rural elementary school in east Tennessee where 51% of the population is below poverty level.
Method / Participants were randomly assigned to either computerized reading with text-to-speech (experimental group) or traditional independent reading (control group) after being matched as closely as possible on reading level and grade level. Kurzweil 3000 version 5 was used for the computerized reading. No other features beyond the visual display on the monitor and the text-to-speech were used. Students were reading material at their instructional level.
For 4 weeks they received 45 minutes of reading intervention for 4 to 5 days each week. All were in a computer lab with room for some desks without computers where the traditional reading took place. The reading material was the same for each peer in the pair, using Accelerated Reading (AR). Both received assistance when requested by raising their hand. After reading everyone, including those in the control group, took the comprehension test from AR on the computer for the book they had just read.
After the 4th week, the group assignments were reversed and each participant received four weeks of intervention in the opposite condition, so that all students received four weeks of the experimental treatment (text scanned into the computer, displayed on the monitor and read aloud using text-to-speech) and control treatment which was a traditional independent reading time.
Results / Overall, the use of computer assisted reading with text-to-speech through Kurzweil 3000 did not significantly increase reading comprehension or reading fluency in elementary school aged readers when compared to a traditional, independent reading approach. There was no significant difference between the groups. The results showed similar reading rates and reading comprehension scores for both treatments.
However, some trends were noted. For the six students who were the lowest performing going into the study, there was some improvement in reading rate, an average of 4 words per minute (wpm), when using the computer. For the faster readers going into the study, the reverse was true. Their reading rate actually decreased by an average of 1 wpm when using the computer. It increased by 6 wpm when in the control situation of traditional independent reading. There was no difference in performance in comprehension. It was the same in both conditions.
Summary / This was a small group with a wide range of reading abilities. The large differences made it difficult to show significance. In addition, the AR comprehension tests taken on the computer may not have been the best way to measure comprehension.
In addition other studies have had very mixed results and have not shown conclusively that computer supported reading is an effective intervention for struggling readers. The trend toward being more effective for the slowest readers is supported by earlier research by Elkind (1998a) which studied post secondary students and showed that slower readers, in contrast to faster readers, benefited from Kurzweil 3000. Based on research, Elkind predicted that readers who read slower than the approximate speed of conversational speech (176 words per minute) would benefit from Kurzweil 3000 and those who read faster would not.
Additional Resources / The full text of this journal article is available from
Implications for the Classroom / Consider computer assisted reading with text-to-speech as a compensatory tool when the student must get meaning from text that is significantly above his or her instructional level, but not when the material is near the instructional level.
Pay attention to student’s reading rate. A slower reader may benefit from computer assisted reading with text-to-speech. Take data to determine if using the computer increases or decreases words read per minute.
Readers who have trouble integrating visual and auditory information may not be helped by computer assisted reading with text-to-speech.
JHCTE- Research A 2.7