P. 1
A Surface Literature Review of the Computer Interface and Interventions within Special Education and Academic Subject Areas

A Surface Literature Review of the Computer Interface and Interventions within Special Education and Academic Subject Areas

4.84

|Views: 2,250|Likes:
Published by bjornpederson
With the trend of computer access growing in classrooms, the need to understand the effects of different computer interventions on student learning is growing exponentially. This review examined a body of literature that applies to understanding the development of the computer interface to the student across the years and the effect of computer interventions within several academic areas focused on high-incidence special education populations. Special education teachers need to be aware of the variety of intervention types that are being offered in which the student’s success has been documented. The results are summarized. Limitations and applications of the research are also discussed.
With the trend of computer access growing in classrooms, the need to understand the effects of different computer interventions on student learning is growing exponentially. This review examined a body of literature that applies to understanding the development of the computer interface to the student across the years and the effect of computer interventions within several academic areas focused on high-incidence special education populations. Special education teachers need to be aware of the variety of intervention types that are being offered in which the student’s success has been documented. The results are summarized. Limitations and applications of the research are also discussed.

More info:

Categories:Types, School Work
Published by: bjornpederson on Apr 07, 2008
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/08/2014

Computers and Special Education

1

Running head: COMPUTER NTERVENTIONS IN SPECIAL EDUCATION

A Surface Literature Review of the Computer Interface and Interventions within Special Education and Academic Subject Areas Bjorn Pederson SPED 996B – Readings in Special Education Professor Epstein, Ed.D Summer 2006

Computers and Special Education

2

Abstract With the trend of computer access growing in classrooms, the need to understand the effects of different computer interventions on student learning is growing exponentially. This review examined a body of literature that applies to understanding the development of the computer interface to the student across the years and the effect of computer interventions within several academic areas focused on high-incidence special education populations. Special education teachers need to be aware of the variety of intervention types that are being offered in which the student’s success has been documented. The results are summarized. Limitations and applications of the research are also discussed.

Computers and Special Education

3

A Surface Literature Review of the Computer Interface and Interventions within Special Education Academic Subject Areas The idea of computers used as a supplement to the standard form of teacherstudent presentation within the classroom has been present since the 1960s (Hansen, 1968). With the introduction of computers beyond that of the laboratory, many different hopes and educational goals were formulated. The computer could serve as a means of reinforcing the learned concepts through drill and practice (Hansen, 1968). The computer could function as a tutor (Brady & Hill, 1984; Tenney & Osguthorpe, 1990). The computer could also be used to free the teacher from presenting remediation sessions to spend more time engaged in quality teaching time (Antonietti & Giorgetti, 2006). While these hopes and goals have been partiality realized, due to the power and functionality of the present day computers, the hopes and goals have yet to be realized to the full extent intended. With the change and advancement of computer technology, the need to understand the effect of this new technology on student learning has grown. Fundamentally the computer and related processes within the computer has not changed (e.g. binary functioning), but the ability to apply and use these processes has grown. As the applied use of computers has grown, so have the power, speed, and management of the processes of computers (e.g. increase in hard drive size, ability to manage a bigger volume of data). Computers have increased in their ability to hold, examine, manipulate, and display information. This increase led to changes in the way that people can interact with a computer including (a) entering, (b) using, and (c) displaying information. The interface of the computer has moved from a generally text-based or command line interface (i.e.

Computers and Special Education

4

entering a command of print or run and waiting for the resulting text output) to that of a graphical interface (i.e. the use a mouse or some other human interactive device to move a graphical icon across the screen or to another location within the computer) (Berg, 2000). This movement from text- based to graphical interface has helped broaden the population of computer users. Within the classroom, the move to a generally graphical interface has allowed for greater acceptance into the classroom and has increased the potential usability of the computer for both the teacher and the student. With all the hopes and educational goals for computers within the classroom, relatively few first-hand studies have been completed, examining the use of computers in the classroom (Campbell, Milbourne, Dugan, & Wilcox., 2006). From the late 1960s to the 1980s, published research into the use of computer and computer applications as a learning medium reached its highest level. Since that time, the body of literature has focused mainly on non-empirical topics (i.e. personal progress, descriptive and theoretical papers) (Campbell et al., 2006). The 1980s and the 1990s talked of the theoretical advantaged of using a computer with the population of students with learning disabilities (Hall, Hughes, & Filbert., 2000).The non-empirical publications provide some information about what has worked in particular situations with students and teachers as well as a means communicating theoretical directions for future research. However, no empirical information is provided for overall implications for general populations of students and their learning process. Computer assisted instruction (CAI) has been examined in a variety of different settings within both mainstream and special education population of students. There appears to be gaps in the amount of research surrounding the areas of spelling, reading,

Computers and Special Education

5

and, the use of computers for behavioral interventions (Dawson, Venn, & Gunter, 2000; Hitchcock, Dowrick, & Prater, 2003). With all of the excitement and potential viewed in the use of computers in the classroom and CAI, the findings from the conducted research may be over generalized (Brady & Hill, 1984). Only a limited number of large scale studies have been conducted. A majority of the studies used small population samples of less than 10, or have utilized post-high school students. The purpose of this review is to examine two different areas of computers within education settings. The first area is focused on the how the interface between the students and the computers has evolved through the years. The second area is focused on different types of interventions that have utilized a computer as a source of skill acquisition or skill improvement as well as the results of those interventions. Methods Initial Selection Criteria A review of published journal articles on the topic of computer based intervention and special education research followed an initial two-step identification procedure. First, an electronic database search of PsycINFO was conducted with the following keywords arranged into three possible search fields for a total of 7 search term combinations: (field one) computer, behavior disorder, emotional disorder, computer aided instruction, computer assisted instruction, (field two) special education, computer, academics, behavior disorder, emotional, and (field three) behavior, computer, emotional. The search filter for peer-reviewed publications was selected. All articles selected were also published between 1968 and 2006. In the initial database search, 357 articles were identified from PsycINFO. Second, the 357 articles were screened for possible inclusion

Computers and Special Education

6

using the following constraints: the study must have focused on the use of computers being involved within the study, a review including studies mentioning the use of computer as an intervention type with students in special education or other wise defined as “at-risk”, or specific mention of historical uses of computers within general or special education. A total of 91 articles were identified for possible inclusion. Results Computer Interface Evolution Throughout the years there has been two main ways of human interface with computers, the use of command language and the use of direct manipulation (Berg, 2000). The use of command language is commonly called the Command Line Interface (CLI). This type of interaction with the computer is based on entering specific orders for a process or action to happen (i.e. print, run, and load). The use of this kind of text based input was prevalent in the early uses of computers in the classroom (Cotton, Gallagher, & Marshall, 1978; Clements & Nastasi, 1999). The process involved understanding and using the proper syntax for the computer or program to interrpret what was to happen in the entered sequence of commands. The use of a graphical based input or graphical user interface (GUI) involves more of a direct manipulation of objects. When a picture representing a file is moved from one folder into another, the movement is interpreted by the computer into a command language and the file is moved within the computer. The use of the CLI-type of interaction for students involved performing planning activities in order for the program to function as desired (Clements & Nastasi, 1999). Planning for the commands meant the students had to have some prior knowledge of what the commands needed to be entered to cause the computer to perform the task as

Computers and Special Education

7

well as what effect the sequence of commands would have in the output. CLI type interaction was also largely dependant on the use of the keyboard for entering and executing the desired functions of the program (G. Fitzgerald, Fick, & Milich, 1986). The text formatting of the letters used in the CLI environment were controlled primarily by the monitor used. Text was either produced as white text on a dark background, a light green text on a dark green background, or a light brown text on a dark brown background (Graham & MacArthur, 1988). With the growth of the power of computers and the inclusion of a higher level of graphic capabilities of the personal computers in the classroom, the programs and interface environment changed as well. While the use of the CLI environment was still utilized, the commands entered into the computer or program would enable a graphic image to change or move depending on the command used. The use of graphics in combination to the typed commands helped to give a direct meaning to the term or value that was entered into the program. As the ability of the computer grew, the computer was able to have a better handling of both graphic and entered commands. The use of a Graphical User Interface (GUI) became common place among computers used in schools (Blok, van DaalenKapteijns, Otter, & Overmaat, 2001). The main instrument of input into a GUI type environment was the mouse. The mouse controlled the curser and moved it around the screen as opposed to the CLI environment where the curser would generally move in linear motions from left to right during typing, or up, down, left, or right using the directional curser keys. The mouse had from one to three buttons for use in selecting items on the screen to move, copy, or delete. With the GUI, files, storage, or program

Computers and Special Education

8

executables could be represented with an icon to symbolize the item’s location or placement. The use of GUI environments to operate computers not only became more predominate, but also became common place among the programs that ran on the computers. The GUI allowed for operations on the computer or in programs to take place without the student having knowledge of the command language needed to perform the tasks desired. For a student to run a program, they did not have to be able to (a) use the keyboard, (b) enter direct commands into the computer, (c) use the correct syntax, (d) identify that it is the correct file, and (e) execute the file. The student now was able to use the mouse, select the file using the buttons on the mouse, and performing a repeated click of the mouse button, or double-click, to open a program. This use of GUI environments in the classroom created bench mark for classroom computer use, pre- and post mouse (Blok et al., 2001). With the use of a GUI environment to interact with the computer, the student must be able to understand what the different symbols present in the GUI mean in order to understand what function of the computer or program is going to happen. A little icon of a floppy disk is considered a universal sign for saving information at a particular point in a program. As GUI environments grow in operation, the intuitiveness of using a computer becomes easier. The need to remember command statements and syntax in order perform tasks decreases. Programs running on a computer are able to use the GUI environment to focus on the directed task for the student, rather than the student having to know the coded sequence of events into order to write a paper using the computer. GUI environments combined the use of symbolic icons and different forms of input to allow

Computers and Special Education

9

access to the various educational programs in a more direct way. By isolating the various skills such as writing a sentence or performing an arithmetic problem, the keyboard use by student was more of a function to complete a direct educational task rather than the key to gain access to the computer program. However, the implementation of more graphics and making the interface appear more inviting than an average computer screen does not always create a better learning environment for the student. In Bahr, Nelson, Van Meter, & Yanna (1996), students were given the task to produce a writing sample using two different word processing programs. One of the programs was an older program using a GUI environment, but did not have many graphical features within the program. The other program was considered to have a heavy graphical representation in the presentation of the program. The students in the study tended to show a higher quality of structure within the writing samples constructed in the older word processing program. The authors attributed this to the older program not having as many visual distracters present when the students had to produce their writing samples. A majority of the programs used in the classroom for any student involve a mouse controlled GUI environment incorporating multimedia stimuli (Alcalde, Navarro, Marchena, & Ruiz, 1998; Blok et al., 2001). Multimedia is the use of other forms of stimuli in a computer program than just the reaction of sight on the computer screen to induce a response. This goes farther than the use of the simple sounds that are able to be created by the computer. This includes the use of a stereo sound, interactive video, and hypertext. This aspect of multimedia brings an alternate form of engagement than the traditional linear format of a text book or traditional video tape (Lawless & Brown,

Computers and Special Education

10

1997). The hypertext, text linking to other information, gives the student an opportunity to gather other information about sub-topics, not just the main topic of the presented material. The linked to source could be found within the program, within the computer, local network, or The World Wide Web (Dillon & Gabbard, 1998). Hypertext also allows for different sections of the material to be presented at anytime the student desired (Lancaster, Schumaker, & Deshler, 2002). Hypertext allows for more control to the student in how and when the information is received, but can provide more flexibility than the student is able to handle (Lawless & Brown, 1997). The use of audio from within programs has been implemented as well. The ability for a computer to reproduce a more human like voice has shown positive effect in quality of answers given by school aged children to questions regarding drug and sexual activity (Black & Ponirakis, 2000). The children reported higher instances of drug and sexual activity to a computer presenting pre-recorded questions than when similar questions were presented in a paper and pencil format. The use a computer produced voice has also shown benefits with students learning social skills in which the text was read with the corresponding picture and target actions, but the quality of the computer generated voice comes into question (Dawson et al., 2000; Hagiwara & Myles, 1999). Use of Computer within an Intervention Writing. Two studies were found that stated specific computer use within a writing intervention used on the students. In Graham & MacArthur's (1988) small subject study, students were taught a self-instructional strategy in order to improve the length and quality of a written product. Three students participated in this multiple baseline study. The students were presented the strategy on the computer. Once the strategy was

Computers and Special Education

11

mastered, the students produced handwritten essays. The strategy instruction appeared to have transferred directly and maintained after the initial presentation. The other study involved the use of two different types of word processors and looked at the resulting entered essays (Bahr et al., 1996). This study examined the effect of word processing programs that included a greater amount of helping and graphical cues for the student’s writing versus word processors that focused more on typing the writing sample with no visual cues from the program. The students reported higher levels of frustration with the more complex program. The writing samples were longer in length and the students spent a larger amount of time typing in the simpler program. Reading. Within Bryant, Goodwin, Bryant, & Higgins' (2003) review of vocabulary interventions, one of the reviewed studies specifically looked at the use a CAI use to build vocabulary skills. A master list of 50 words was divided into different amounts for presentation to the two groups. One group would have no more than 10 words per day and the other group had no more than 25 words presented per day. The students with learning disabilities, receiving resource room support, were randomly divided between the two conditions. This study was more focused on the amount of the words presented per day rather than the influence of the technology on the students. The type of activities mentioned used within the CAI were a series of multiple choice type activities involving filling in the missing word in the sentence, identification of the synonym and the antonym, and the use of arcade style game. The use of computers as a means of modeling correct pronunciation when reading aloud showed to have higher incidence of words read correctly per minute and words read correctly in total per session (Dawson et al., 2000). Within the study, a total of four

Computers and Special Education

12

elementary-aged students receiving special education services for emotional/behavioral disorder (EBD) participated in a multiple treatment design. The design included (a) no modeling / reading out loud independently, (b) reading out loud with the computer simulated male voice, and (c) reading out loud with the teacher. While the result indicate that the student performed better with the teacher, the performance with the computer was significantly better than the independent reading. The use of the computer generated voice was a built in function of the computers used in the study and no changes were indicated to make the computer voice sound any more or less human-like than what was present in the original systems. The authors did discuss that the digitized sound from the computer voice was a limitation, but did not appear to have an adverse effects on the students. Within Hall et al. (2000) review of CAI interventions for reading and students with learning disabilities, the 17 studies examined showed that CAI can provide support to students who need help with further developing their skills. However, the review also reinforces that the human element of teacher interaction and instruction is not recommended to be removed from the instruction. While CAI can provide specific practice for individual students, the need for a teacher to guide the instruction and learning of the student remains a key piece in the overall practice of reading development. Math. A review of published studies concerning interventions for solving math word problems included three studies involving CAI type interventions (Jitendra & Xin, 1997). Two of these studies involved comparing a CAI presentation verses a teacher directed instruction. The third study involved different varieties of CAI including

Computers and Special Education

13

animated or static pictures presented during the strategy instruction, and a control group with static pictures on a computer and not presenting the strategy. The three studies presented showed that CAI is a viable means to provide instruction for solving math word problems. Some concerns discussed included the type of curriculum design that is presented in the CAI or in the classroom and how well the two presentations are able to work together. Another concern included the teachers and the students having the resources and knowledge to implement CAI in the classroom effectively. A review examining different interventions for mathematics specifically for students receiving EBD services found one study dealing specifically with a CAI math intervention (Hodge, Riccomini, Buford, & Herbst, 2006). The identified study examined the results between using paper and pencil and a CAI drill and practice program to complete basic computation review sets. The review does not describe the program used within the study, but does mention that the outcome of the study had the students preferring the use of the paper and pencil. This preference was speculated because there was not any set reinforcement within the program and the students were able to perform the sets faster by writing out the answers. Spelling. The use of CAI in the context of a spelling intervention was explored in one small population study and a review on spelling interventions which included nine studies involving CAI. The use of a spelling program versus a teacher presented intervention showed to have little effect on the students (G. Fitzgerald et al., 1986). The program used in the study had the students copy the word requested to spell and, after the word was correctly copied, the student spelled the word with out the model. The teachers provided a

Computers and Special Education

14

traditional approach, as defined by the study, of saying the word and having the students write the word. There was also a control section of students that did not receive any spelling intervention during the study. The outcome of the study showed that the results of the CAI and the teacher presentation method showed little difference between the two. Both of the intervention methods showed higher levels of correctly spelled words than those students in the control group. While these results do not present a better means of testing student’s knowledge of spelling, the use of the CAI intervention was noted to free the teacher from directly giving the spelling tests. Fulk & Stormont-Spurgin's (1995) review of spelling interventions included nine studies that had a computer based or computer assisted instruction. Positive effects were reported on interventions that examined: (a) individual spelling instruction, (b) time delay word spelling, (c) providing positive computer activities, (d) increasing on-task rates during spelling practice activities, and (e) error elimination and modeling. Within the review the programs used in the studies were not described. Special Education Specific Interventions. There were three individual studies found dealing specifically with issues presented in special education learning areas such as mediation after aggressive behavior, social skill instruction, and self-advocacy. Use of a computer program to help cue a second grade student with EBD on mediation techniques after an aggressive behavior incident showed promise in a small population study (G. E. Fitzgerald & Werner, 1996). The student was trained to use the program as means of communicating with the teacher about what happened to cause the behavior and to provide a framework for writing a mediation statement. The program was based on a flashcard type system with choices of the desired classroom behavior and the

Computers and Special Education

15

undesired classroom behavior. The flashcards employed the use of language at the level of the student as well as graphics to illustrate content of the cards. After making choices regarding the desired behavior, the student had to write a mediation statement to the teacher. This program showed a marked change in the amount of aggressive behaviors across 25 school days. This system was also in place with a behavioral plan including earning points for positive behaviors and the use of the computer to produce the mediation statement occurred during the student’s stated preferred activities. Another study involving the use of the same type of computer program showed positive results in elementary aged students with autism learning the social skills of appropriate hand washing and on-task behavior (Hagiwara & Myles, 1999). The program incorporated a customized social story for the desired behaviors. The vocabulary was crafted to the student’s level and pictures of the student themselves performing the task. With each student that used the program, there appeared to be a trend to consistently perform the desired tasks. Generalization of the behaviors was not reached during the timeframe of the study. A similar method was used to work with students with high incidence disabilities in a high school setting for learning a self-advocacy strategy (Lancaster et al., 2002). The strategy examined by the study was designed and intended to help students with individual education plan meetings and how to advocate for the student’s needs and desires for goals and service planning for the next school year. The program used in this instance made use of hypertext and allowed the student to move backward and forward within the training modules. This program also had video and audio clips to guide and explain what each section was about. The interactive hypertext program was compared to

Computers and Special Education

16

live instruction as well as to a control group with no strategy instruction. The results indicated that the computerized strategy instruction had very similar results to that of the live instruction. The results also stated that less direct teaching time was spent with the students in the computerized instruction group (m = 68 min.) than the live instruction group (m = 163 min.) by a significant amount. Both groups had a similar amount of total time for the complete strategy presentation. Discussion This review examined the changing interface of computers throughout the past four decades and looked at the use of computers within the classroom as a means of intervention and looked. The interface between the student and the computer has moved from a command line interface based entirely on text and knowledge of computer syntax to a graphical user interface based on icons and is considered to be more intuitive for students when using computers. The use of computer as an intervention tool was found across multiple subject categories including math, spelling, reading, writing, and within the specific special education areas. These interventions were reported to generally have positive effects with the students for each intervention area when compared to the results of non-intervention condition. The results for the computer intervention conditions tended to have similar results to that of the teacher lead intervention. These results across studies indicate that computer interventions for common subject areas within highincidence special education disabilities can be as effective as teacher lead instruction. The use of computers within the school setting has been looked at for application of various academic areas in order to support student receiving special education services. The application of computer programs to support students has shown potential

Computers and Special Education

17

as a viable resource for reinforcing and maintaining knowledge and strategy use by the student. However, the generalization that the use of computers are as beneficial to supporting students receiving special education services as live teacher presentations of skills and strategies is not yet founded within the current literature. For this current review, the studies and reviews cited tended to use small populations within a multiple baseline design, not large populations with an experimental design. The studies and reviews examined that showed positive results mentioned an element of customization that was applied to the program in order to meet the needs and match the academic abilities of the participating students. Understanding and adapting to what the student’s needs are appears to be a common factor for a potential successful use of a computer program within a special education population. This idea of a student first focus is also one of the key underpinnings for how to approach any intervention for a student receiving special education (Woodward & Rieth, 1997). For the use of computer to be considered as a means to effectively work with students, a few logistical issues need to be addressed (Jitendra & Xin, 1997). The areas to be considered before making the commitment to using a computer as means to address a student’s special education needs are (a) the cost of the hardware (i.e., computer, monitor, keyboard, mouse) and the application software, (b) the teacher training and willingness to integrate into the classroom routine, (c) the teaching of the fundamental skills for running the computer to the teacher and the student, and (d) managing student behavior. Presentation of the computer intervention is another area to be addressed. The student’s educational level and ability to use the computer and the program need to be carefully examined by the teacher. The movement from a beginning level student on the

Computers and Special Education

18

computer to a more competent level should be monitored and mentored (Alcalde et al., 1998). The definitions within the program and the graphical metaphors used for the learning environment presented within the computer intervention are main areas to address with the student (Brandon & Hollingshead, 1999). The teacher needs to be aware of how the program is presented and what areas might need more direct guidance before simply turning the student over to the computer program. This brings forth another issue with the presentation of a computer intervention. The teacher needs to know how well the program presents the material intended to be presented to the student (Johnston, 1987). Understanding the strengths and limitations of a program takes some advanced planning and time to figure out if the program will fit with needs of the students. Also, the teachers needs to understand if there are any customization options within the program and how those options might be applied to fit within the needs and goals of the student. Future research into computer interventions serving students with high incidence disabilities needs to examine the following issues (a) how the changing interface of computers has impacted the amount of time students have been presented with computer interventions, (b) the amount of training time needed for a teacher to integrate a computer intervention into their repertoire for students receiving special education services, and (c) how the advertised product of a computer intervention compares to the actual use within the school setting. While computer interventions are seen as a means to save time and energy for the teacher, there is still much to learn about the impact of the interventions and their effect. Computers do provide a means for applying and further development of concepts, but the

Computers and Special Education

19

power they have does not quite match that of human presentation and reinforcement at least as of yet.

Computers and Special Education

20

References Alcalde, C., Navarro, J. I., Marchena, E., & Ruiz, G. (1998). Acquisition of basic concepts by children with intellectual disabilities using a computer-assisted learning approach [Electronic version]. Psychological Reports, 82(3), 1051. Antonietti, A., & Giorgetti, M. (2006). Teachers' beliefs about learning from multimedia [Electronic version]. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 267. Bahr, C. M., Nelson, N. W., Van Meter, A., & Yanna, J. V. (1996). Children's use of desktop publishing features: Process and product [Electronic version]. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 7(3), 149. Berg, G. A. (2000). Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) in educational environments: Implications of understanding computers as media [Electronic version]. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(4), 349. Black, M. M., & Ponirakis, A. (2000). Computer-administered interviews with children about maltreatment: Methodological, developmental and ethical issues [Electronic version]. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15(7), 682. Blok, H., van Daalen-Kapteijns, M. M., Otter, M. E., & Overmaat, M. (2001). Using computers to learn words in the elementary grades: An evaluation framework and a review of effect studies [Electronic version]. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14(2), 99. Brady, E. H., & Hill, S. (1984). Young children and microcomputers: Research issues and directions [Electronic version]. Young Children, 39(3), 49. Brandon, D. P., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1999). Collaborative learning and computersupported groups [Electronic version]. Communication Education, 48(2), 109.

Computers and Special Education

21

Bryant, D. P., Goodwin, M., Bryant, B. R., & Higgins, K. (2003). Vocabulary instruction for students with learning disabilities: A review of the research [Electronic version]. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(2), 117. Campbell, P. H., Milbourne, S., Dugan, L. M., & Wilcox, M. J. (2006). A review of evidence on practices for teaching young children to use assistive technology devices [Electronic version]. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 26(1), 3. Clements, D. H., & Nastasi, B. K. (1999). Metacognition, learning and educational computer environments [Electronic version]. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 10, 5. Cotton, J. W., Gallagher, J. P., & Marshall, S. P. (1978). A multimethod generative CAI system for remedial mathematics [Electronic version]. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 10(2), 203. Dawson, L., Venn, M. L., & Gunter, P. L. (2000). The effects of teacher versus computer reading models [Electronic version]. Behavioral Disorders, 25(2), 105. Dillon, A., & Gabbard, R. (1998). Hypermedia as an educational technology: A review of the quantitative research literature on learner comprehension, control, and style [Electronic version]. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 322. Fitzgerald, G., Fick, L., & Milich, R. (1986). Computer-assisted instruction for students with attentional difficulties [Electronic version]. Journal of learning disabilities, 19(6), 376.

Computers and Special Education

22

Fitzgerald, G. E., & Werner, J. G. (1996). The use of the computer to support cognitivebehavioral interventions for students with behavioral disorders [Electronic version]. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 7(3), 127. Fulk, B. M., & Stormont-Spurgin, M. (1995). Spelling interventions for students with disabilities: A review [Electronic version]. Journal of Special Education, 28(4), 488. Graham, S., & MacArthur, C. (1988). Improving learning disabled students' skills at revising essays produced on a word processor: Self-instructional strategy training [Electronic version]. Journal of Special Education, 22(2), 133. Hagiwara, T., & Myles, B. S. (1999). A multimedia social story intervention: Teaching skills to children with autism [Electronic version]. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 14(2), 82. Hall, T. E., Hughes, C. A., & Filbert, M. (2000). Computer assisted instruction in reading for students with learning disabilities: A research synthesis [Electronic version]. Education & Treatment of Children, 23(2), 173. Hansen, D. (1968). Computer-assisted instruction and the individualization process [Electronic version]. Journal of School Psychology, 6(3), 177. Hitchcock, C. H., Dowrick, P. W., & Prater, M. A. (2003). Video self-modeling intervention in school-based settings: A review [Electronic version]. Remedial and Special Education, 24(1), 36. Hodge, J., Riccomini, P. J., Buford, R., & Herbst, M. H. (2006). A review of instructional interventions in mathematics for students with emotional and behavioral disorders [Electronic version]. Behavioral Disorders, 31(3), 297.

Computers and Special Education

23

Jitendra, A., & Xin, Y. P. (1997). Mathematical word-problem-solving instruction for students with mild disabilities and students at risk for math failure; a research synthesis [Electronic version]. Journal of Special Education, 30(4), 412. Johnston, V. M. (1987). The evaluation of microcomputer programs: An area of debate [Electronic version]. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 3(1), 40. Lancaster, P. E., Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (2002). The development and validation of an interactive hypermedia program for teaching a self-advocacy strategy to students with disabilities [Electronic version]. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25(4), 277. Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (1997). Multimedia learning environments: Issues of learner control and navigation [Electronic version]. Instructional Science, 25(2), 117. Tenney, R. A., & Osguthorpe, R. T. (1990). Elementary age special education students using self-directed or tutor-assisted computer-aided instruction to develop keyboarding skills [Electronic version]. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 6(2), 215. Woodward, J., & Rieth, H. (1997). A historical review of technology research in special education [Electronic version]. Review of Educational Research, 67(4), 503.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->