Description

Use this talking word processor with associated word pictures or animations. A library of onscreen grids provides word banks, sentence structure and story writing activities. Designed for assisting all students with reading skills, it is compatible with switches and scanning methods.

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.

• font size and/or color
  Users can adjust the size and color of the text. Use increased font size to help students with minor visual impairments or those who would benefit from less text per screen view. Use color choices to organize or accentuate information on the screen or increase the contrast of text to background for students with low vision or for whom reading on the screen causes eye fatigue.

Differentiation

Differentiation describes the ability to individualize a program to meet students' differing needs and monitor progress.

• multiple user profiles
  Multiple user profiles allows several users to work on the same program and save their activity and responses separately.

• teacher control
  Teacher control allows the teacher to program components of an activity to meet individual students' needs.

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.

• e-dictionary
  An e-dictionary allows the user to access a digital dictionary and immediately get a definition of a selected word. Use this feature to build vocabulary and English language skills and to promote independent work habits.

• e-thesaurus
  An e-thesaurus allows users to access a digital thesaurus and immediately get an entry for a selected word. Use this feature to help students expand their vocabulary and improve their writing.

• 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 notes or tags
  Text notes or tags give users the ability to take notes on the screen as they read. Use this feature to encourage students to interact with text as active readers and promote better reading comprehension.

Input Options

A variety of input devices and applications provide access to the computer and peripheral devices for users with special needs.

• on-screen keying
  On-screen keying allows users to input information on a virtual keyboard displayed on the computer screen. Users may access the virtual keyboard using a joystick or pointer. Use this feature with students with mobility impairments or students who do not know how to type.

• scanning input
  Scanning input allows users to select an item (communication symbols, items from a menu, etc.) from a group of items on the computer screen, generally using a switch. The program highlights each item on the screen in order; users press a switch when their desired item is highlighted. Use this feature with students who cannot use a keyboard or mouse to access a computer.

• voice recognition
  Voice recognition (or speech recognition) converts the user?s speech to text. These computer programs allow users to access a computer (typing documents, using the internet, etc.) with voice alone. Use this feature with students who cannot use a mouse or keyboard and have control of their voice.

Output Options

A variety of output devices and applications provide access to digital information coming from the computer and peripheral devices for users with special needs.

• print or save results
  This feature allows users to print or save their work. Use this feature to track progress of students who cannot use pencil or pen to complete assignments.

• sound output  for visual tasks
  This feature provides users with an audible output when completing visual tasks. This may take the form of a simple sound when a user has selected an item or redundant auditory output in addition to a visual display (descriptions of images, etc.). Use this feature with students who have visual impairments.

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.

• dynamic highlighting
  Dynamic highlighting allows the user to select how the screen reader highlights (colors) text as it is read ? by word, phrase, sentence, or paragraph. This feature helps students track the text and stay in sync with the narration. As a general rule of thumb, more fluent readers can focus on whole paragraphs while early and struggling students may need a word by word focus.

• 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.

• reading rate control
  Reading rate control allows the user to customize the speed at which the text is spoken. Use this feature to adjust the reading pace to match an individual student. When working on a goal of increasing reading speed, try having the student increase the rate slightly.

• reads graphics descriptions
  This feature reads the descriptive tags that accompany graphics and images. Use this feature to help students with low vision or blindness navigate programs independently.

• 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.

opportunities to learn concepts

Adams, M.J. (2006). The promise of automatic speech recognition for fostering literacy growth in children and adults. International handbook of literacy and technology, 2, 109-128.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

Bottge, B. & Hasselbring, T. (1993). Comparison of two approaches for teaching complex, authentic mathematics problems to adolescents in remedial math classes. Exceptional Children, Vol. 59 (6), 556-566.

Campbell, M. L. & Mechling, L.C. (2009). Small group computer-assisted instruction with SMART Board Technology: An investigation of observational and incidental learning of nontarget information. Remedial and Special Education, Vol. 30 (1), 47-57.

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.

Dalton, B. Pisha, B., Eagleton, M., Coyne, P., & Deysher, S. (2001). Engaging the text: Reciprocal teaching and questioning strategies in a scaffolded learning environment. Final report to the U.S. Department of Education. Peabody, MA: CAST.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Flener, F. (2000). Use of interactive video technology to teach middle school mathematics. Northeastern Illinois University, Dept. of Teacher Education: Final Evaluation Report. Chicago, IL. (ERIC ED451055).

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.

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.

Goldman, S., & Hasselbring, T. (1997). Achieving meaningful mathematics literacy for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 30 (2), 198-208.

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

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. (2004). Achievement differences in structured versus unstructured instructional geometry programs. Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 52 (1), 19-32.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Kano, K., Yahata, S., Muroi, K., Kawakami, M., Tomoda, M., Miyaki, K., Nakayama, T., Kosugi, S., & Kato, K. (2008). Multimedia presentations on the human genome: Implementation and assessment of a teaching program for the introduction to genome science using a poster and animations. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, Vol. 36(6), 395-401.

Kara, Y. & Yesilyurt, S. (2008). Comparing the impacts of tutorial and edutainment software programs on students' achievements, misconceptions, and attitudes towards biology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 17(1), 32-41.

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.

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.

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

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.

Levy, S.T., & Wilensky, U. (2009). Students' learning with the Connected Chemistry (CC1) Curriculum: Navigating the complexities of the particulate world. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 18(3), 243-254.

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., 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. (1999). Overcoming barriers to writing: Computer support for basic writing skills. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, Vol. 15, 169-92.

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.

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.

Malinow, A., & Black, J. (2003). Integrating a multiple-linked representational program into a middle-school learning disabled classroom. Proceedings from the 2003 International Conference on Computing in Education sponsored by the Asia-Pacific Chapter of the Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE): Hong Kong.

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.

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

Morgan, P., & Ritter, S. (2002). Experimental study of the effects of Cognitive Tutor Algebra 1 on student knowledge and attitude. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Learning, Inc. Accessed April 1, 2005.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

Reimer, K., & Moyer, P. (2005). Third-graders learn about fractions using virtual manipulative: A classroom study. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, Vol. 24 (1), 5-25.

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.

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).

Reznichenko, N. (2007). Learning with Graphing Calculator (GC): GC as a cognitive tool. Paper presented at the Annual EERA Conference (Clearwater, FL, Feb, 2007).

Rice, M., Huston, A., Rosemarie, T., & Wright, J. (1990). Words from "Sesame Street": Learning vocabulary while viewing. Developmental Psychology, Vol. 26 (3), 421-428.

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.

Sarama, J. & Clements, D. (2004). Building blocks for early childhood mathematics. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, Vol. 19, 181-189.

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.

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.

Seo, Y. & Bryant, D.P.. (2009). Analysis of studies of the effects of computer-assisted instruction on the mathematics performance of students with learning disabilities. Computers & Education, Vol. 53(3), 913-928.

She, H. & Chen, Y. (2009). The impact of multimedia effect on science learning: Evidence from eye movements. Computers & Education, Vol. 53(4), 1297-1307.

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.

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

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

Twyman T., & Tindal G. (2006). Using a computer-adapted, conceptually based history text to increase comprehension and problem-solving skills of students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 5-16.

Tzur, R. (1999). An integrated study of children's construction of improper fractions and the teacher's role in promoting that learning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Vol. 30 (4), 390-416.

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.

Utay, C., Utay, J. (1997). Peer-assisted learning: The effects of cooperative learning and cross-age peer tutoring with word processing on writing skills of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, Vol. 8, 165-185.

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.

Watson, S., & Johnston, L. (2007). Assistive technology in the inclusive science classroom. Science Teacher, Vol. 74 (3), 34-38.

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

Xing, M., Wang, J., & Spencer, K. (2008). Raising students' awareness of cross-cultural contrastive rhetoric in english writing via an e-learning course. Language Learning & Technology, Vol. 12 (2), 71-93.

Yang, H. J., Lay, Y. L., Liou, Y. C., Tsao, W. Y. & Lin, C. K. (2007). Development and evaluation of computer-aided music-learning system for the hearing impaired. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol. 23 (6), 466-476.

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.