Abstract
The primary goal of this research was to extend our understanding of the strengths and weaknesses inherent in online and offline early literacy software programs designed for young learners. A taxonomy of reading skills was used to contrast online software with offline closed system (compact disc) based programs with respect to number of skills taught, quality of instruction and scaffolding during instruction. Overall, online programs were more comprehensive and provided instruction for more skills than offline software at either the Kindergarten or Grade 1 level. However, offline programs demonstrated some developmentally appropriate selectivity in skills trained. Quality of instruction was variable within and across all programs. Scaffolding of instruction was also variable and surprisingly few programs, either online or offline, provided automatic movement across levels of difficulty. These outcomes have important implications for the selection of instructional materials by parents and educators involved in early literacy instruction and also for future software design.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Archer, K., Savage, R., Sanghera-Sidhu, S., Wood, E., Gottardo, A., & Chen, V. (2014). Examining the effectiveness of technology use in classrooms: A tertiary meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 78, 140–149.
Biancarosa, G., & Griffiths, G. G. (2012). Technology tools to support reading in the digital age. The Future of Children, 22(2), 139–160.
Blok, H., Oostdam, R., Otter, M. E., & Overmaat, M. (2002). Computer-assisted instruction in support of beginning reading instruction: A review. Review of Educational Research, 72(1), 101–130.
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1986). Psychological theory and the study of learning disabilities. The American Psychologist, 41(10), 1059–1068.
Bus, A. G., de Jong, M. T., Verhallen, M. J. A. J., & van der Kooy-Hofland, V. A. C. (2008). Design features in living books and their effects on young children’s vocabulary. In S. B. Neuman (Ed.), Educating the other America (pp. 263–276). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
Bus, A. G., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1999). Phonological awareness and early reading: A meta-analysis of experimental training studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 403.
Clark, E. V. (2009). First language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2008). Learning by viewing versus learning by doing: Evidence-based guidelines for principled learning environments. Performance Improvement, 47(9), 5–13.
Clay, M. M. (1977). Reading: The patterning of complex behaviour. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books Inc.
Deacon, S. H., & Kirby, J. R. (2004). Morphological awareness: Just “more phonological”? The roles of morphological and phonological awareness in reading development. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25(2), 223–238.
Dickinson, D. K., McCabe, A., Anastasopoulos, L., Peisner-Feinberg, E. S., & Poe, M. D. (2003). The comprehensive language approach to early literacy: The interrelationships among vocabulary, phonological sensitivity, and print knowledge among preschool-aged children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 465.
Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Willows, D. M., Schuster, B. V., Yaghoub Zadeh, Z., & Shanahan, T. (2001). Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Reading research Quarterly, 36(3), 250–287.
Flynn, R. M., & Richert, R. A. (2015). Parents support preschoolers’ use of a novel interactive device. Infant and Child Development,. doi:10.1002/icd.1911.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 239–256.
Gee, J. (2008). Good videogames, the human mind, and good learning. In E. Wood & T. Willoughby (Eds.), Children learning in a digital world (pp. 40–63). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Gilbert, J. K., Goodwin, A. P., Compton, D. L., & Kearns, D. M. (2013). Multisyllabic word reading as a moderator of morphological awareness and reading comprehension. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(1), 34–43.
Grant, A., Wood, E., Gottardo, A., Evans, M., Phillips, L., & Savage, R. (2012). Assessing the content and quality of commercially available reading software programs: Do they have the fundamental structures to promote the development of early reading skills in children? NHSA: Dialogue, 15(4), 319–342. doi:10.1080/15240754.2012.725487.
Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. A. (2006). Oral reading fluency norms: A valuable assessment tool for reading teachers. The Reading Teacher, 59(7), 636–644.
Jorm, A. F., & Share, D. L. (1983). Phonological recoding and reading acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 4(2), 103–147.
Karemaker, A., Pitchford, N. J., & O’Malley, C. (2010). Enhanced recognition of written words and enjoyment of reading in struggling beginner readers through whole-word multimedia software. Computers & Education, 54(1), 199–208.
Korat, O., Shamir, A., & Segal-Drori, O. (2014). E-books as a support for young children’s language and literacy: The case of Hebrew-speaking children. Early Child Development and Care, 184(7), 998–1016.
Lonigan, C. J., Schatschneider, C., Westberg, L., & The National Early Literacy Panel. (2008). Identification of children’s skills and abilities linked to later outcomes in reading, writing, and spelling. Developing early literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel (pp. 55–106). Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.
Marsh, J., Hannon, P., Lewis, M., & Ritchie, L. (2015). Young children’s initiation into family literacy practices in the digital age. Journal of Early Childhood Research. doi:10.1177/1476718X15582095.
Mayer, R. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
McKenney, S., & Voogt, J. (2010). Technology and young children: How 4–7 year olds perceive their own use of computers. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 656–664.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the national reading panel: “Teaching children to read” summary report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and human development Clearinghouse.
Olson, R., & Wise, B. (2006). Computer-based remediation for reading and related phonological disabilities. In M. C. McKenna, L. D. Labbo, R. D. Kieffer, & D. Reinking (Eds.), International handbook of literacy and technology (Vol. 2, pp. 57–74). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Keeping the metaphor of scaffolding fresh-A response to C. Addison Stone’s “the metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities”. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(4), 370–373.
Palincsar, A. S., Klenk, L., Anderman, E., Parecki, A., & Wilson, A. (1991). Exploring zones of proximal development for literacy acquisition with young children identified as learning disabled. Exceptionality Education Canada, 1(3), 105–125.
Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Piasta, S. B., Justice, S. B., Justice, L. M., McGinty, A. S., & Kaderavek, J. N. (2012). Increasing young children’s contact with print during shared reading: Longitudinal effects on literacy achievement. Child Development, 83(3), 810–820.
Puntambekar, S., & Hübscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1–12.
Rideout, V. (2013). Zero to eight: Children’s media use in America 2013 (Rep.). Retrieved http://www.commonsensemedia.org/research/zero-to-eight-childrens-media-use-in-america-2013.
Roschelle, J. M., Pea, R. D., Hoadley, C. M., Gordin, D. N., & Means, B. M. (2000). Changing how and what children learn in school with computer-based technologies. The Future of Children, 10(2), 76–101.
Savage, R. S., Abrami, P., Hipps, G., & Deault, L. (2009). A randomized controlled trial study of the Abracadabra reading intervention program in Grade 1. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 590–604.
Savage, R., Abrami, P. C., Piquette, N., Wood, E., Deleveaux, G., Sanghera-Sidhu, S., & Burgos, G. (2013). A (pan-Canadian) cluster randomized control effectiveness trial of the Abracadabra web-based literacy program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 310–328.
Sefton-Green, J. (2006). Youth, technology, and media cultures. Review of Research in Education, 30(1), 279–306.
Su, B., & Draper-Rodriguez, C. (2012). Identifying the key features in computer learning games. In Proceedings of global TIME 2012 (pp. 148–153). Monterey Bay, CA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Swing, E. L., & Anderson, C. A. (2008). How and what do video games teach? In T. Willoughby & E. Wood (Eds.), Children’s learning in a digital world (pp. 64–84). Oxford: Blackwell.
Takacs, Z., Swart, E., & Bus, A. (2015). Benefits and pitfalls of multimedia and interactive features in technology-enhanced storybooks: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 698–739. doi:10.3102/0034654314566989.
Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What fourty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational Research, 81(1), 4–28.
Van der Kleij, F., Feskens, R., & Eggen, T. (2015). Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: A meta-analysis outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 475–511. doi:10.3102/0034654314564881.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child Development, 69(3), 848–872.
Wild, M. (2000). Designing and evaluating an educational performance support system. British Journal of Educational Technology, 31, 5–20.
Willoughby, T., & Wood, E. (2008). Children’s learning in a digital world. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Willoughby, T., Wood, E., Desjarlais, M., Williams, L., Leacy, K., & Sedore, L. (2009). Social interaction during computer-based activities: Comparisons by number of sessions, gender, school-level, gender composition of the group, and computer-child ratio. Sex Roles, 61(11–12), 864–878.
Yopp, H. (1992). Developing phonemic awareness in young children. The Reading Teacher, 45, 696–703.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) for the grant to support this research.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wood, E., Grant, A.K., Gottardo, A. et al. Software to Promote Young Children’s Growth in Literacy: A Comparison of Online and Offline Formats. Early Childhood Educ J 45, 207–217 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-016-0779-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-016-0779-9