Description

Use this supplementary year-long literacy program to boost decoding and reading comprehension skills. The program is theme-based on animals at the first grade level and is delivered with books and digital activities. Software is compatible with scanning overlay.

List of Features

Customizable Interface

Customizable interface allows the user to adjust and arrange the visual and audio components of the program according to his/her preferences and needs.

• desktop view options
  Desktop view options are controls that adjust the appearance of items on the desktop. Use this feature to adjust the size of icons for students with minor visual impairments, or the amount and position of icons to keep the desktop clutter-free and easy to navigate.

Embedded Resources

Embedded resources are reference and study resources that exist as a part of the program and can be accessed from within the program. Use these resources to save students time looking in extra materials.

• highlighting
  Highlighting gives the user the capability of adding highlights to text on the screen. Use this as an instructional feature to mark the main idea, topic sentence, or important details, or for editing feedback. Most programs have multiple colors so that users can color-code their annotations. Have students use the features as a study activity.

Text to Speech

Text to speech tools convert written language into spoken language. Use these tools with students who have visual impairments or who struggle with decoding or vocabulary. They can provide the scaffolding for students to read independently at a higher and more challenging level.

• multiple voices
  Multiple voices is a program option that allows the user to select from a variety of voices, which may include a male, female, or child's voice, or various character voices. Use these choices to find a voice that is appropriate to the text or appeals to the student.

• recorded human narration
  Recorded human narration is a recording of a live person which provides a more natural inflection than a synthesized voice. Use texts with these narrations to promote fluency through repeated readings and choral readings.

• synthesized
  Synthesized speech is the electronic voice of the computer, which sounds more mechanical than a human voice but can be used with a wide range of texts. Use texts with this feature to help students with decoding and pronunciation of individual words.

List of Related Research by Learning Support(s)

multimedia products and projects

Annetta, L.A., Minogue, J., Holmes, S.Y., Cheng, M. (2009). Investigating the impact of video games on high school students' engagement and learning about genetics. Computers & Education, Vol. 53(1), 74-85.

Babbit, B., & Miller, S. (1996). Using hypermedia to improve the mathematics problem-solving skills of students with disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 29 (4), 391-401.

Biggs, M., Homan, S., Dedrick, R., Minick, V., & Rasinski, T. (2008). Using an interactive singing software program: A comparative study of struggling middle school readers. Reading Psychology, 29(3),195-213.

Boyle, E. A., Rosenberg, M. S., Connelly, V. J., Washburn, S. G., Brinckerhoff, L. C., & Banerjee, M. (2003). of audio texts on the acquisition of secondary-level content by students with mild disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(3), 203-214

Bruce, D. (2008). Visualizing literacy: Building bridges with media. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 24(3), 264-282.

Chambers, B., Abrami, P., Tucker, B., Slavin, R., Madden, N., Cheung, A., & Gifford, R. (2005). Computer-assisted tutoring in Success for All: Reading outcomes for first graders. American Educational Research Journal

Chambers, B., Cheung, A., Gifford, R., Madden, N., & Slavin, Robert (2005). Achievement effects of embedded multimedia in a Success for All reading program. Journal of Educational Psychology.

Chang, K., Chen, Y., Lin, H., & Sung, Y. (2008). Effects of learning support in simulation-based physics learning. Computers & Education, Vol. 51(4), 1486-1498.

Chase, C.C., Chin, D.B., Oppezzo, M. A. & Schwartz, D. L. (2009). Teachable agents and the protege effect: Increasing the effort towards learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 18(4), 334-352.

Dori, Y.J. & Sasson, I. (2008). Chemical understanding and graphing skills in an honors case-based computerized chemistry laboratory environment: The value of bidirectional visual and textual representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 45(2), 219-250.

Doty, D. E., Popplewell, S. R., & Byers, G. O. (2001). Interactive CD-ROM storybooks and young readers' reading comprehension. of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 374

Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 18(1), 7-22.

Elder-Hinshaw R., Manset-Williamson G., Nelson J. M., & Dunn M. W. (2006). Engaging older students with reading disabilities: Multimedia inquiry projects supported by reading assistive technology. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(1), 6-11.

Ely, R., Emerson, R. W., Maggiore, T., O’Connell, T., & Hudson, L. (2006). Increased content knowledge of students with visual impairments as a result of extended descriptions. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(3), 31–43

Evmenova, A. S. (2008). Lights! Camera! Captions!: The effects of picture and/or word captioning adaptations, alternative narration, and interactive features on video comprehension by students with intellectual disabilities. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University College of Education and Human Development

Frailich, M., Kesner, M., & Hofstein, A. (2009). Enhancing students' understanding of the concept of "chemical bonding" by using activities provided on an interactive website. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 46(3), 289-310.

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2000). Using objective data sources to enhance teacher judgments about test accommodations. Exceptional Children, 67(1), 67

Gentry, J. (2008). E-Publishing's impact on learning in an inclusive sixth grade social studies classroom. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, Vol. 19 (3), 455-467.

Heimann, M., Nelson, K. E., Tjus, T., & Gillberg, C. (1995). Increasing reading and communication skills in children with autism through an interactive multimedia computer program. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 25(5), 459-480.

Hoover, M.A. & Pelaez, N.J. (2008). Blood circulation laboratory investigations with video are less investigative than instructional blood circulation laboratories with live organisms. Advances in Physiology Education, Vol. 32(1), 55-60.

Huang, H. C., & Eskey, D. E. (1999). The effects of closed-captioned television on the listening comprehension of intermediate English as a Second Language (ESL) students. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 28(1), 75–96.

Kaberman, Z., Dori, J.Y. (2009). Question posing, inquiry, and modeling skills of chemistry students in the case-based computerized laboratory environment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, Vol. 7(3), 597-625.

Kay, R., & Knaack, L. (2007). Evaluating the use of learning objects for secondary school science. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, Vol. 26(4), 261-289.

Ke, F. (2008). A case study of computer gaming for math: Engaged learning from gameplay?. Computers & Education, Vol. 51 (4), 1609-1620.

Koolstra, C. M., & Beentjes, J. W. J. (1999). Children’s vocabulary acquisition in a foreign language through watching subtitled television programs at home. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(1), 51.

Krange, I., Ludvigsen, S. (2008). What does it mean? Students' procedural and conceptual problem solving in a CSCL environment designed within the field of science education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, Vol. 3(1), 25-51.

Lewis, M. S. J., & Jackson, D. W. (2001). Television literacy: Comprehension of program content using closed captions for the deaf. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 6(1), 43-53.

Li, Q. (2008). Equity in math and science: A technology-supported teaching and learning model. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, Vol. 36 (3), 287-295.

Linebarger, D. L. (2001). Learning to read from television: The effects of using captions and narration. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 288–298

Linebarger, D., Kosanic, A. Z., Greenwood, C. R., & Doku, N. S. (2004). Effects of viewing the television program Between the Lions on the emergent literacy skills of young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 297-308.

MacBride, R. & Luehmann, A. L. (2008). Capitalizing on emerging technologies: A case study of classroom blogging. School Science and Mathematics, Vol. 108(5), 173-183.

Marbach-Ad, G., Rotbain, Y., & Stavy, R. (2008). Using computer animation and illustration activities to improve high school students' achievement in molecular genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 45, 273-292.

Mavers, D., Somekh, B., & Restorick, J. (2002). Interpreting the externalized images of pupils' conceptions of ICT: Methods for the analysis of concept maps. Computer & Education, Vol. 38, 187-207.

Mitchell, B., Bailey, J. L., & Monroe, E. (2007). Integrating technology and a standards-based pedagogy in a geometry classroom: A mature teacher deals with the reality of multiple demands and paradigm shifts. Computers in the Schools, 24(1-2), 75 - 91.

Neuman, S. (1990). Using captioned television to improve the reading proficiency of language minority students. Vienna, VA: National Captioning Institute, Incorporated

O'Bryan, A. (2008). Providing pedagogical learner training in CALL: Impact on sudent use of language-learning strategies and glosses. CALICO Journal, 26 (1), 142-159.

Ozmen, H., Demircioglu, H., & Demircioglu, G. (2009). The effects of conceptual change texts accompanied with animations on overcoming 11th grade students' alternative conceptions of chemical bonding. Computers & Education, Vol. 52(3), 681-695

Painter, D.D. (2009). Providing differentiated learning experiences through multigenre projects. Intervention in School and Clinic, Vol. 44 (5), 288-293.

Papalewis, R. (2004). Struggling middle school readers: Successful, accelerating intervention: Read 180 program. Reading Improvement, 41(1), 24-37

Peli, E., & Fine, E. M. (1996). Evaluating visual information provided by audio description. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 90(5), 378–385

Pisha, B., & Coyne, P. (2001). Smart from the start: The promise of Universal Design for Learning. Remedial and Special Education, 22(4), 197-203

Podszebka, D., Conklin, C., Apple, M., & Windus, A. (1998). Comparison of video and text narrative presentations comprehension and vocabulary acquisition. Paper presented at the SUNY-Geneseo Annual Reading and Literacy Symposium, Geneseo, NY

Pol, H.J., Harskamp, E.G., Suhre, C.J.M., & Goedhart, M.J. (2009). How indirect supportive digital help during and after solving physics problems can improve problem-solving abilities. Computers & Education, Vol. 53(1), 34-50.

Reagon, K. A., Higbee, T. S., & Endicott, K. (2007). Using video instruction procedures with and without embedded text to teach object labeling to preschoolers with autism: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Special Education Technology, 22(1), 13

Reinking, D. (2005). Multimedia learning of reading. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 355-376. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Rotbain, Y., Marbach-Ad, G., & Stavy, R. (2008). Using a computer animation to teach high school molecular biology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 17(1), 49-58.

Sapp, W. (2007). MySchoolDayOnline: Applying universal design principles to the development of a fully accessible online scheduling tool for students with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 101(5), 301-307.

Scadden, L. A. (1996). Making mathematics and science accessible to blind students through technology. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation

Sedig, K. (2008). From play to thoughtful learning: A design strategy to engage children with mathematical representations. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, Vol. 27 (1), 65-101.

Shea, P. (2000). Leveling the playing field: A study of captioned interactive video for second language learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 22(3), 243–263.

Shroyer, E., & Birch, J. (1980). Captions and reading rates of hearing-impaired students. American Annals of the Deaf, 125, 916–922

Steinfeld, A. (1998). The benefit of real-time captioning in a mainstream classroom as measured by working memory. Volta Review, 100(1), 29.

Stern, L., Barnea, N., & Shauli, S. (2008). The effect of a computerized simulation on middle school students' understanding of the kinetic molecular theory. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 17(4), 305-315.

Trey, L., & Khan, S. (2008). How science students can learn about unobservable phenomena using computer-based analogies. Computers & Education, Vol. 51(2), 519-529.

Trushell, J., & Maitland, A. (2005). Primary pupils' recall of interactive storybooks on CD-ROM: Inconsiderate interactive features and forgetting. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(1), 57-66

Urhahne, D., Nick, S., & Schanze, S. (2009). The effect of three-dimensional simulations on the understanding of chemical structures and their properties. Research in Science Education, Vol. 39(4), 495-513.

Ward P., Wang, Y., Paul, P., & Loeterman, M. (2007). Near-verbatim captioning versus edited captioning for students who are deaf or hard of hearing: A preliminary investigation of effects on comprehension. American Annals of the Deaf, 152(1), 20.

Xin, J. F., & Rieth, H. (2001). Video-assisted vocabulary instruction for elementary school students with learning disabilities. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 87-103

Zucker, A. A., Tinker, R.,; Staudt, C., Mansfield, A., & Metcalf, S. (2008). Learning science in grades 3-8 using probeware and computers: Findings from the TEEMSS II Project. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 17(1), 42-48.

practice and reinforcement activities

Alper S. & Raharinirina S. (2006). Assistive technology for individuals with disabilities: A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 47-64.

Annetta, L.A., Minogue, J., Holmes, S.Y., Cheng, M. (2009). Investigating the impact of video games on high school students' engagement and learning about genetics. Computers & Education, Vol. 53(1), 74-85.

Anstrom, T. (2006). Supporting Students in Mathematics through the Use of Manipulatives. CITEd

Anthony, J., Cantor, B., Driscol, K., Goldstein, H., Lonigan, C., & Phillips, B. (2003). Computer-assisted instruction phonological sensitivity program for preschool children at-risk for reading problems. Journal of Early Intervention, Vol. 25, 248-262.

Babbit, B., & Miller, S. (1996). Using hypermedia to improve the mathematics problem-solving skills of students with disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 29 (4), 391-401.

Barker, T., & Torgesen, J.K. (1995). An evaluation of computer-assisted instruction in phonological awareness with below average readers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, Vol. 13 (1), 89-103.

Beattie, K. (2001). The effects of intensive computer-based language intervention on language functioning and reading achievement in language-impaired adolescents. Dissertation Abstracts Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.

Beck, J. (2002). Emerging literacy through assistive technology. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35, 44-48.

Bickel, R.D., Bowling, N., Cadle, C., Cunningham, M.L., Jones, J.D., & Staats, W.D. (2004). An evaluation of the Merit reading software in the Calhoun County, WV middle/high school. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, Vol. 37, pp 177-194.

Blue, E.V., Ceprano, M.A., Henry, J.J., O'Quin, K., & Paterson, W.A. (2003). Investigating the effectiveness of an integrated learning system on early emergent reader. Reading Research Quarterly, Vol. 38, 172-207.

Boone, R., & Higgins, K. (1990). Hypertext computer study guides and the social studies achievement of students with disabilities, remedial students, and regular education students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 23, 529-540.

Boone, R., Higgins, K., & Lovitt, T. (1996). Hypermedia text-only information support for students with learning disabilities and remedial students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 29, 402-412.

Borman, G.D. & Benson, J. (2006). Can brain research and computers improve literacy? A randomized field trial of the FastForWord Language computer-based training program. (WCER Working Paper No. 2006-5). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research.

Borman, G.D., Slavin, R.E., Cheung, A., Chamberlain, A., Madden, N., & Chambers, B. (2006). Final reading outcomes of the national randomized field trial of Success for All. Retrieved from Success for All Web site: http://www.successforall.net/_images/pdfs/Third_Year_Results_06.doc.

Bos, C.S., Coleman, M., Levy, S., & Vaughn, S. (2002). Reading instruction for students with LD and EBD: A synthesis of observation studies. The Journal of Special Education, Vol. 36, 2-13

Bouck, E.C. (2009). Calculating the value of graphing calculators for seventh-grade students with and without disabilities: A pilot study. Remedial and Special Education, Vol. 30(4), 207-215.

Burns, L., Elkind, J., Elkind, K., Hecker, L., & Katz, L. (2002). Benefits of assistive reading software for students with attention disorders. Annals of Dyslexia, Vol. 52, 243-272.

Butzin, S. (2001). Using instructional technology in transformed learning environments: An evaluation of project CHILD. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, Vol. 33 (4), 367-373.

Chambers, B., Abrami, P., Tucker, B., Slavin, R., Madden, N., Cheung, A., & Gifford, R. (2005). Computer-assisted tutoring in Success for All: Reading outcomes for first graders. American Educational Research Journal

Chambers, B., Cheung, A., Gifford, R., Madden, N., & Slavin, Robert (2005). Achievement effects of embedded multimedia in a Success for All reading program. Journal of Educational Psychology.

Chicago Public School pilot; Research report. (2000). Earobics: Early literacy instruction. Cognitive Concepts Report.

Christensen, C., & Gerber, M. (1990). Effectiveness of computerized drill and practice games in teaching basic math facts. Exceptionality, Vol. 1 (3), 149-165.

Coyne, P., Dalton, B., Dysher, S., Eagleton, M., & Pisha, B. (2001). Engaging the text: Strategy instruction in a computer-supported reading environment for struggling readers. OSEP project Final Report accessed on 05/18/04.

Dalton, B., Winbury, N. E., Cobb-Morroco, C. (1990). "If you could just push a button": Two fourth grade boys with learning disabilities learn to use a computer spelling checker. Journal of Special Education Technology, Vol. 10, 177-191.

Dianda, M., & Flaherty, J. (1995). Report on workstation uses: Effects of Success for All on the reading achievement of first graders in California bilingual programs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Dunleavy, M., & Heinecke, W. (2008). The impact of 1:1 laptop use on middle school math and science standardized test scores. Computers in the Schools, 24(3-4), 7-22.

Elkind, J. (1998). Computer reading machines for poor readers. Lexia Institute

Erickson, K. & Stanger, C. (2003). Balanced literacy instruction and an integrated beginning reading program. Unpublished.

Filbert, M., Hall, T.E. & Hughes, C.A. (2000). Computer-assisted instruction in reading for students with learning disabilities: A research synthesis. Education & Treatment of Children, Vol. 23, 173-193.

Fischel, J.E., Bracken, S. S., Fuchs-Eisenberg, A., Spira, E. G., Katz, S., & Shaller, G. (in press). Evaluation of curricular approaches to enhance preschool early literacy skills. Journal of Literacy Research.

Foster, K.C., Erickson, G.C., Foster, D.F., Brinkman, D. & Torgesen, J.K. (1994). Computer administered instruction in phonological awareness: Evaluation of the DaisyQuest program. Journal of Research and Development in Education, Vol. 27 (2), 126-137.

Fox, B.J., Pascoe, J.P., & Wilson, M.S. (2003). The theory and research bases of Sterling Editions Intervention Programs. Laureate Learning

Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C., & Appleton, A. (2002). Explicitly teaching for transfer: Effects on the mathematical problem-solving. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, Vol. 17 (2), 90-106.

Gerlach, G. J., Johnson, J. R., & Ouyang, R. (1991). Using an electronic spell checker to correct misspelled words and verify correctly spelled words. Reading Improvement, Vol. 28, 188-194.

Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D.S., & Van Lehn, K. (2005). Scaffolding deep comprehension strategies through Point&Query, AutoTutor, and iSTART. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 225-234

Graham, S. (1997). Executive control in the revising of students with learning and writing difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 89, 223-234.

Graham, S. (1990). The role of production factors in learning disabled students' compositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 82, 781-91.

Hancock, C.M. (2002). Accelerating reading trajectories: The effects of dynamic research-based instruction. Dissertation Abstracts International, Vol. 63 (06), 2139A. (UMI No. 3055690).

Hannafin, R. D., & Foshay, W. R. (2008). Computer-Based Instruction's (CBI) rediscovered role in K-12: An evaluation case study of one high school's use of CBI to improve pass rates on high-stakes tests. Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 56 (2), 147-160.

Hasselbring, T., Lott, A., & Zydney, J. (2005). Technology supported math instruction for students with disabilities: Two decades of research. CITEd

Haynes, J.B., & MacArthur, C.A. (1995). Student Assistant for Learning from Text (SALT): A hypermedia reading aid. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 28, 150-159.

Hecht, S.A., & Close, L. (2002). Emergent literary skills and training time uniquely predict variability in responses to phonemic awareness training in disadvantaged kindergarteners. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, Vol. 82 (2), 93-115.

Heimann, M., Nelson, K. E., Tjus, T., & Gillberg, C. (1995). Increasing reading and communication skills in children with autism through an interactive multimedia computer program. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 25(5), 459-480.

Hickey, D.T., Ingram-Goble, A.A., Jameson, E.M. (2009). Designing assessments and assessing designs in virtual educational environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 18(2), 187-208.

Higgins, K., & Boone, R. (1996). Hypertext support for remedial students and students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 29 (4), 402-412.

Horton, S., Lovitt, T., Givens, A., & Nelson, R. (1989). Teaching social studies to high school students with academic handicaps in a mainstreamed setting: Effects of a computerized study guide. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 22 (2), 102-107.

Innes Helsel, F., Hitchcock, J., Miller, G., Malinow, A., & Murray, E. (2006). Identifying evidence-based, promising and emerging practices that use screen-based and calculator technology to teach mathematics in grades K-12: A research synthesis. www.CITEd.org

James, D., Rajput, K., Brinton, J., & Goswami, U. (2008). Phonological awareness, vocabulary, and word reading in children who use cochlear implants: Does age of implantation explain individual variability in performance outcomes and growth?. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 13(1), 117-137.

Jamison, P., Pokorni, J., & Worthington, C. (2004). Phonological awareness intervention: A comparison of three programs -- FastWord, Earobics, and LiPS. Journal of Educational Research

Johanson, J., Bell, C., & Daytner, K. (2008). Evaluating the effectiveness of a technology-based preschool literacy project: A final report of the LitTECH outreach project. Center for Best Practices in Early Childhood Education.

Jones, I. (1994). The effect of a word processor on the written composition of second-grade pupils. Computers in the Schools, Vol. 11, 43-54.

Judge, S. (2006). Constructing an assistive technology toolkit for young children: Views from the field. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(4), 17-24.

Ke, F. (2008). A case study of computer gaming for math: Engaged learning from gameplay?. Computers & Education, Vol. 51 (4), 1609-1620.

Kulik, C., & Kulik, J. (1991). Effectiveness of computer based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 7 (1-2), 75-94.

Lacava P. G., Golan O., Baron-Cohen S., & Myles B. S. (2007). Using assistive technology to teach emotion recognition to students with Asperger Syndrome: A pilot study. Remedial and Special Education, 28(3), 174-181.

Lancaster P. E., Lancaster S. J. C., Schumaker J. B., & Deshler D. D. (2006). The efficacy of an interactive hypermedia program for teaching a test-taking strategy to students with high-incidence disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 17-30.

Lange, A., McPhillips, M., Mulhern, G., & Wylie, J. (2006). Assistive software tools for secondary-level students with literacy difficulties. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(3), 13-22.

Lewandowski, L., & Montali, J. (1996). Bimodal reading: Benefits of a talking computer for average and less skilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 29, 271-279.

Lewandowski, L., Begeny, J., & Rogers, C. (2006). Word-recognition training: Computer versus tutor. Reading & Writing Quarterly, Vol. 22, 395-410.

Lewis, R. (1998). Assistive technology and learning disabilities: Today's realities and tomorrow's promises. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 31, 16-26.

Lewis, R. B., Ashton, T. M., Haapa, B., Kieley, C. L., Fielden, C. (1999). Improving the writing skills of students with learning disabilities: Are word processors with spelling and grammar checkers useful?. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 9, 87-98.

Linebarger, D., Kosanic, A. Z., Greenwood, C. R., & Doku, N. S. (2004). Effects of viewing the television program Between the Lions on the emergent literacy skills of young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 297-308.

MacArthur, C. A. (1991). Knowledge of revision and revising behavior among students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, Vol. 14, 61-73.

MacArthur, C. A. (1994). Peers + word processing + strategies = A powerful combination for revising student writing. TEACHING Exceptional Children, Vol 27, 24-29.

MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S. (1997). Learning disabled students' composing under three methods of text production: Handwriting, word processing, and dictation. The Journal of Special Education, Vol. 21, 22.

MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S., Haynes, J. B., & DeLaPaz, S. (1996). Spelling checkers and students with learning disabilities: Performance comparisons and impact on spelling. Journal of Special Education, Vol. 30, 35-57.

MacArthur, C. A., Schwartz, S. S., & Graham, S. (1996). Effects of a reciprocal peer revision strategy in special education classrooms. Journal of Special Education, Vol. 30, 35-57.

Macleod, F., Macmillan, P., & Norwich, B. (2007). "Listening to myself": Improving oracy and literacy among children who fall behind. Early Child Development and Care, Vol. 177 (6-7), 633-644.

McKenna M. C., Walpole S. (2007). Assistive technology in the reading clinic: Its emerging potential. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1), 140-145.

McNaughton, D., Hughes, C., Ofiesh, N. (1997). Proofreading for students with learning disabilities: Integrating computer and strategy use. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 30, 643-651.

Mechling L. C. (2006). Comparison of the effects of three approaches on the frequency of stimulus activations, via a single switch by students with profound intellectual disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 40(2), 94-102.

Mitchell, B., Bailey, J. L., & Monroe, E. (2007). Integrating technology and a standards-based pedagogy in a geometry classroom: A mature teacher deals with the reality of multiple demands and paradigm shifts. Computers in the Schools, 24(1-2), 75 - 91.

Mitchell, M.J., & Fox, B.J. (2001). The effects of computer software for developing phonological awareness in low-progress readers. Reading Research and Instruction, Vol. 40 (4), 315-332

Montali, J. (2000). Facilitating memory in children with reading disabilities through computerized bimodal presentation. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.

Mostow, J., Burkhead, P., Corbett, A., Cuneo, A., Eitelman, S., Huang, C., Junker, B., Sklar, M. B., & Tobin, B. (2003). Evaluation of an automated reading tutor that listens: Comparison to human tutoring and classroom instruction.. Journal of Educational Computing Research, Vol. 29 (1), 61-117.

Murray, B., Silver-Pacuilla, H., Innes Helsel, F. (2007). Improving basic mathematics instruction: Promising technology resources for students with special needs. CITEd

Obringer, J., Coffey, K., McFadden, G., Etheridge, J.,& Pounder, R. (2007). Keyboarding accuracy for a student with physical disabilities: A synergistic approach. Physical Disabilities: Education and Related Services, 25(2), 59-66.

Okolo, C. (1992). Effects of computer-assisted instruction format and initial attitude on the arithmetic facts proficiency and continuing motivation of students with learning disabilities. Exceptionality, Vol. 3, 195-211.

Okolo, C. (1992). Effects of computer-based attribution retraining on the attributions, persistence, and mathematics computation of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 25 (5), 327-334.

Olson, K., Ring, J., & Wise, B. (2000). Individual differences in gains from computer assisted-remedial reading. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, Vol. 77, 197-235.

Overbay, A., & Baenen, N. (2003). Fast ForWard evaluation, 2002-03. (Eye on Evaluation, E&R Report No. 03.24). Raleigh, NC: Wake County Public School System.

Passerino, L. M., & Santarosa, L. M. C. (2008). Autism and digital learning environments: Processes of interaction and mediation. Computers & Education, Vol. 51 (1), 385-402.

Peltenburg, M., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Doig, B. (2009). Mathematical power of special-needs pupils: An ICT-based dynamic assessment format to reveal weak pupils' learning potential. British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 40(2), 273-284.

Pindiprolu, S.S., & Forbush, D. (2009). Computer-based reading programs: A preliminary investigation of two parent-implemented programs with students at risk for reading failure. Journal of the International Association of Special Education, Vol. 10 (1), 71-81.

Poel, E. W. (2007). Enhancing what students can do: Assistive technology devices can help students with special needs fully participate in the classroom. Educational Leadership, 64-66.

Pyon, S. M. (2008). Why math blogs?. Teaching Children Mathematics, 14(6), 331-335.

Raphael, T. E. (1990). Reading and writing: Partners in constructing meaning. The Reading Teacher, Vol. 43, 388-400.

Raskind, M. H., Higgins, E. L. (1995). Effects of speech synthesis on the proofreading efficiency of postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, Vol. 18, 141-158.

Reitsma, P. & van Daal, V (2000). Computer-assisted learning to read and spell: Results from two pilot studies. Journal of Research in Reading, Vol. 23, 181-193.

Reznichenko, N. (2007). Learning mathematics with graphing calculator: A study of students' experiences. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association (EERA) (Clearwater, FL, Feb 2007).

Schmid, R., Miodrag, N., & Di Francesco, N. (2008). A human-computer partnership: The tutor/child/computer triangle promoting the acquisition of early literacy skills. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, Vol. 41 (1), 63-84.

Schultz, L.H. (1994-1995). A validation study of Wiggleworks, the Scholastic Beginning Literacy System. Unpublished paper.

Schwartz, S. S., & MacArthur, C. A. (1990). Creating a community of writers: The computers and writing instruction project. Preventing School Failure, Vol. 34, 9 - 13.

Shiah, R., Mastropieri, M., Scruggs, T., & Fulk, B. (1994). The effects of computer-assisted instruction on the mathematical problem solving of students with learning disabilities. Exceptionality, Vol. 5 (3), 131-161.

Stoddard, B., MacArthur, C. A. (1993). A peer editor strategy: Guiding learning-disabled students in response and revision. Research in the Teaching of English, Vol. 27, 76-103.

Torgesen, J., Myers, D., Schirm, A., Stuart, E., Vartivarian, S., & Mansfield, W., et al. (2006). National assessment of Title I interim report - Volume II: Closing the reading gap: First year findings from a randomized tiral of four reading interventions for striving readers. Retrieved from Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education Web site: http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/disadv/title1interimreport/index.html

Troia, G.A., & Whitney, S. D. (2003). A close look at the efficacy of Fast ForWord Language for children with academic weaknesses. Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 28, 465-494.

van Daal, V.H.P., & van der Leij, A. (1992). Computer-based reading and spelling practice for children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 25, 186-195.

Van Eck, R. (2006). The effect of contextual pedagogical advisement and competition on middle-school students' attitude toward mathematics and mathematics instruction using a computer-based simulation game. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, Vol. 25 (2), 165-195.

Van Eck, R. & Dempsey, J. (2002). The effect of competition and contextualized advisment on the transfer of mathematics skills in a computer-based instructional simulation game. Educational Technology, Research and Development, Vol. 50 (3), 23-41.

Voogt, J., & McKenney, S. (2008). Using ICT to foster (pre) reading and writing skills in young children. Computers in the Schools, 24(3-4), 83-94.

What Works Clearinghouse (2009). Intervention: I CAN Learn® Algebra and Pre-Algebra. Institute of Education Sciences, U. S. Department of Education.

Wilson, R., & Majsterek, D. (1996). Effects of computer-assisted versus teacher directed instruction on the multiplication performance of elementary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 29 (4), 382.

Wisniewski, Z., & Smith, D. (2002). How effective is touch math for improving students with special needs academic achievement on math addition mad minute timed tests?. Indiana University South Bend. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED469445).

Wong, B. Y. L. (1996). Teaching low achievers and students with learning disabilities to plan, write, and revise opinion essays. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 29, 197-212.

Wong, B. Y. L. (1994). Teaching problem learners revision skills and sensitivity to audience through two instructional modes: Student-teacher versus student-student interactive dialogues. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, Vol. 9, 78-90.

Xin, F. (1996). Effects of computer-assisted cooperative learning in mathematics in integrated classrooms for students with and without disabilities. Rowan College of New Jersey, Special Education Department. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED412696).