What is the Impact of Digital Tools on Literacy Skills in the Elementary School Setting?

Alexandra Zurek and Gabrielle Antalffy

Loyola University Maryland

In partial fulfillment for

AD 776.601/ED 776.601

Instructor: Gordon Michaloski, Ph.D.

November 25, 2016

DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 2

Abstract

In this research review, we examined the effect of digital tools on literacy skills in the

elementary school setting. We found that there was no difference in reading comprehension

when reading was the primary focus on electronic books as opposed to printed books. We also

found that when participants used the digital tools available with the e-books, such as narration

and the dictionary, their comprehension did increase. Students who used computer programs

and/or apps in order to enhance foundational phonics skills were also more successful than those

who did not. Technology and digital tools can be beneficial in helping students increase literacy

skills, especially when used as an intervention with struggling readers.

DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 3

Introduction

Introduction to Educational Issue & Statement of the Problem

Education in the recent years of the 21st century has experienced some of the most rapid

changes it has ever seen in the history of the field due to the impacts of technological

devices. Technology has transformed the way teachers instruct students, communicate with

parents, plan lessons, and engage students in learning. With the inclusion of technology,

specifically computers, tablets, and devices, teachers and students are able to easily access

information. This access to technology has helped to make it easier for teachers to differentiate

and customize instruction to fit students’ specific needs. In the past three years, the Baltimore

County Public School system (BCPS) has provided every student and teacher with a device,

allowing for students to have unlimited access to technology.

Reading proficiency is one of the most important academic skills needed to be successful

in school. Students who struggle with the foundational reading skills in the primary grades fall

further behind their peers as they move into the intermediate and higher grades (Musti-Rao, Lo,

& Plati, 2015, p. 154). According to the National Center of Education Statistics (2011), 51% of

African American, 49% of Hispanic, and 53% of Native American fourth-grade students were

reading below basic levels. BCPS has such a diverse population of students with varying

academic needs; therefore, teachers are attempting to utilize the devices in a way in which they

can enhance and expand students’ reading skills. With the access to technology and the need to

increase students’ literacy skills, we reviewed studies in order to research the question, “What is

the impact of digital tools on literacy skills in the elementary school setting?”

Review Questions/ Sub-Questions

 What is the impact of digital tools on literacy skills in the elementary school setting?
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 4

 Which digital tools, if any, are most beneficial for increasing literacy skills in the

elementary school setting?

Significance of the Review

In this review, we studied a variety of digital tools that may help increase literacy skills.

Literacy skills are important because children should be able to identify letters, read words

fluently, and comprehend what they are reading in order to be successful in all other subject

areas. This review would be helpful for teachers of all subjects because it is believed that if

students acquire basic reading skills in their younger years, then it is more likely that they will

not fall behind as they move into the later grades. If they are able to read and comprehend texts

successfully, then this important skill will transfer into other subject areas.

Key Terms

In this review, we refer to literacy tools as being e-books, iPads, computers and/or

devices, and apps or computer programs. In addition, literacy skills include word recognition,

fluency, and reading comprehension. Word recognition is the ability to accurately identify letters

and words, primarily in the early elementary stages. Fluency refers to the ability to read aloud

accurately, at a steady pace, and with expression. We also evaluate reading comprehension as a

literacy skill, which includes the ability for a child to read a text and recount the information and

events accurately.

Review of the Literature

Tablet vs. Paper: The Effect on Learners’ Reading Performance

In the study, Tablet vs. Paper: The Effect on Learners’ Reading Performance, by Hakan

Dundar and Murat Akcayir, students in the fifth grade used tablet PCs and printed books to
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 5

assess reading performance, reading speed, and reading comprehension. Researchers used both

quantitative and qualitative studies.

Twenty students were included in this study and randomly assigned to one of two

groups. Ten of those students were in the control group whose primary reading source was the

printed books, and the other ten students were a part of the experimental group whose primary

reading source was the tablet PC. In the quantitative study, both groups read the exact same

text. Each student read independently to the researcher, and as s/he was reading, the researcher

was noting words read correctly in one minute. After the student finished reading, the researcher

also asked 10 “simple” comprehension questions with one asking students to summarize the

main theme of the text. The goal of this study was to identify any difference in students’

academic performance or behavior when reading on the tablet rather than the printed books. The

qualitative results were determined after an interview was conducted with each student in the

experimental group. The researchers also asked the students for their opinion on reading on the

tablet PC.

The quantitative and qualitative results were analyzed in different ways. The data

regarding reading speed was analyzed by calculating the number of words read correctly in one

minute. The level of reading comprehension was analyzed by using a grading system in which

no response received a 0, a half-answered response received a 1, and a complete answer received

a 2. The qualitative study asked a series of three questions. According to Dundar & Akcayir

(2012), they asked the following questions:

 Do you prefer a tablet computer or a book to read texts? Why?

 Would you like to have all of your other books on the tablet PC?

 Did you have problems with the use of the tablet PC?
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 6

The researchers found that there was no significant difference in the reading speed of the

students who read the printed books and those that read on the tablet PC. They also found a

similar pattern in the students’ reading comprehension. It did not make a difference whether or

not students were reading on a tablet PC or in a printed book. After interviewing the students in

the experimental group, the researchers found that the students’ opinions on reading on the tablet

PC was a positive experience.

The researchers concluded that there was no difference in reading speed or

comprehension when reading on the tablet PC versus the printed book. The researchers did,

however, conclude that students would rather read on a tablet PC over the printed text when they

have the choice to do so. Lastly, the researchers also concluded that further studies would be

beneficial to determine the overall reading performance of students.

Using E-Readers and Internet Resources to Support Comprehension

The authors Sandra Wright, April Fugett, and Francine Caputa of the article Using E-

Readers and Internet Resources to Support Comprehension studied the difference between

electronic story books and paper-based books in regards to vocabulary and reading

comprehension. They also studied the use of reading resources, such as the dictionary,

thesaurus, and text-to-speech feature when reading on an electronic device and the effect it has

on overall reading comprehension. The authors predicted that the participants of this study

would increase their reading comprehension by using the electronic tools available on the e-book

compared to reading the traditional paper-based book.

This study recruited participants through a series of questionnaires and assessments. A

parent questionnaire was first given. Then, if the child qualified, they were assessed using an
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 7

oral reading test and a standardized language assessment. After the authors analyzed the

information, they found three second-grade female students between the ages of 7 years and 8

years and 11 months who met the criteria needed to participate in this study. These students had

abilities “within normal limits for their age in reading skills” (Wright, Fugett, & Caputa, 2011, p.

371). The authors also noted that all three participants came from a middle socioeconomic status

and English was the primary language spoken.

In this study, an “AB experimental design was conducted” where each participant served

as her own control (Wright, Fugett, & Caputa, 2011, p. 371). Each student met four times within

a three-week period for one and a half to two hours each time. The participants met on days

when school was not in session. During each meeting time, individual participants read one

story using a paper-based book and one story using an iPad. While reading the paper-based

story, each student was allowed to use a paper-based dictionary and/or thesaurus. They were

also given the opportunity to ask the researchers questions that arose while reading. When they

read on the iPad, they were able to use the dictionary, thesaurus, and word pronunciation

tools. All three students were taught how to access and use these resources prior to

reading. After each reading session, a 4-question reading comprehension quiz was given to

assess their understanding of the story.

There were two data sets collected in this study. In the first set, the participants tallied

the number of times that they used the available resources. To verify these numbers, the

researchers used a video recording of the participants. The second set of data was determined by

the number of correct responses on the comprehension quizzes.

In the first data set, the researchers found that the available resources were only used

when reading on the iPad. The participants did not access any available resources while reading
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 8

the paper-based book. In the second data set, the researchers determined that there was no

significant difference in quiz scores based on the reading source.

The researchers concluded that there was no substantial change between reading on the

iPad and reading the print-based book. This disproved the researchers’ hypothesis where they

originally believed that reading comprehension would increase by using the electronic tools. The

researchers stated that in order to produce more accurate results, a larger number of participants

would be needed. Other factors to consider would be different socioeconomic statuses, ages of

participants, and learning abilities.

Electronic Books: children’s reading and comprehension

In the study, Electronic Books: children’s reading and comprehension, the authors

researched the difference in children’s comprehension based on the type of book read by the

participants. Shirley Grimshaw, Naomi Dungworth, Cliff McKnight, and Anne Morris used both

printed and electronic copies of storybooks to assess children’s reading comprehension. There

were three types of formats used; printed storybooks and texts on a CD-ROM with and without

narration.

The researchers of this study recruited 132 children between the ages of 9 years and 9

months and 11 years and 2 months to participate in this study. Of those 132 students, 72 were

females and 60 were males. Fifty-one children were chosen to read a short passage from The

Magicians of Caprona and eighty-one children read The Little Prince. The group that read The

Magicians of Caprona were broken into two subgroups with 25 reading the printed version and

26 reading the electronic version, without any narration. The participants who read The Little

Prince were broken into three subgroups with 29 reading the printed version, 26 reading the
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 9

electronic version without narration, and 26 reading the electronic version with narration. The

children in this study all spoke English as their first language and came from a variety of social

and ethnic backgrounds.

In this study, each child worked one-on-one with one of the researchers to read and

respond to a series of comprehension questions. After the participants read their assigned text,

they were given a 15-question comprehension quiz, which included multiple choice, short

answer, and text retrieval questions. The children were encouraged to go back into the text to

find their answers. The only stipulation was for the group that received the electronic text with

narration. They were not able to access the narration feature while completing the

comprehension quiz.

The researchers scored the comprehension quizzes out of 20 points. The researchers then

calculated the mean scores for each group. Once the data was analyzed, the researchers

performed a t-test and found that within the group that read The Magicians of Caprona, there

was no significant difference found in comprehension scores. The mean score of the children

who read the printed text was 13.80 and the mean score of the children who read the electronic

version was 12.35. The researchers also performed a one-way ANOVA and found that within

the group that read The Little Prince, there was a significant difference in comprehension. The

sample group who received narration scored significantly higher on the comprehension quiz than

those who did not receive narration. “The mean scores for the three conditions (printed, CD-

ROM with narration, and CD-ROM without narration) were 10.9, 13.08, and 10.38 respectively”

(Grimshaw, Dungworth, McKnight, & Morris, 2007, p. 593).

After conducting this study, the researchers concluded that there was not a significant

difference in comprehension between those who read the printed text or the electronic version;
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 10

however, there was a significant difference in comprehension between those who used narration

and those who did not. The researchers believed that “narration benefited the children’s ability

to both retrieve information directly and to make inferences from the text” because the narrator

used intonation and expression. Pictures and sound effects were also provided (Grimshaw,

Dungworth, McKnight, & Morris, 2007, p. 597).

Independent Reading of CD-ROM Storybooks: Measuring Comprehension With Oral

Retellings

The study, Independent Reading of CD-ROM Storybooks: Measuring Comprehension

With Oral Retellings, by Cathy Pearman, was conducted in order to investigate the difference in

scores of students’ oral retelling of a text. The researcher chose students with varying degrees of

reading proficiency to participate in this study. She studied the difference between the text being

presented through CD-ROM storybook format and the traditional print format.

This study consisted of 54 second grade students from an elementary school in the

Southern United States. Of these 54 students, 29 were male and 25 were female. In this study,

there were 32 white students, 1 black student, and 21 Hispanic students involved. It was noted

that all of these students who attended the selected elementary school had been using the

computer at least once a week since kindergarten for skill building and vocabulary

practice. Based on a diagnostic test given by the classroom teachers, students were placed into a

low, medium, or high group. This helped the researcher to best match the text to their current

reading level. Each leveled group was assigned two traditional print books which were leveled

using the Fountas and Pinnell system. The same stories were used via CD-ROM. Because the

purpose of this study was to analyze reading comprehension while independently reading, the
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 11

researcher disabled the total narration tool; however, other tools, such as pronunciations,

graphics, definitions, and the highlighter, were available. Each student in this study read one text

at their reading level in traditional print and the other in the electronic version. For example, the

first student read Electronic Text A and Traditional Text B, while the second student read

Traditional text A and Electronic Text B.

While conducting the study, students were given the choice to read the story (traditional

print or electronic) silently or orally to themselves. After students finished reading, they were

asked to retell or summarize what they remembered from the text. Data was collected over a 20-

day period, in which students were tested in individual 15 to 30 minute sessions. Sessions were

not completed consecutively. For each student, the sessions were spread apart by approximately

three days. During these sessions, the researcher took field notes on students’ behavior while

reading the texts. She also asked students whether or not they had access to a computer at

home.

Data was analyzed after all students finished their reading sessions. Students were

audiotaped so that outside raters could score the students’ retellings. They used a 10-point scale

in which students needed to identify the characters and setting, the theme, plot, resolution, and

sequence.

The researcher found that there “was not a significant difference between the mean scores

on oral retellings observed in the two text formats for the reading proficiency levels of high and

medium. The analysis of data for the low reading proficiency level revealed a significant

difference between mean scores on oral retellings observed in the two text formats” (Pearman,

2008, p.600). Pearman found that the retelling scores were much higher for the electronic text

version as opposed to the traditional print format.

DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 12

The researcher concluded that there was a significant difference between the low and

medium/high reading proficiency levels in regards to retelling after reading the electronic text

formats. During the reading, it was noted that students in the low group used the pronunciation

tool more often than those in the medium or high groups. Overall, the researcher indicated that

the use of “CD-ROM storybooks may facilitate reading comprehension for second-grade

students who are struggling with developing reading skills and strategies. Therefore, the use of

CD-ROM storybooks in the classroom as part of a reading instruction program, literacy center,

or for independent reading time could be beneficial for young readers” (Pearman, 2007, p. 601).

Using an iPad App to Improve Sight Word Reading Fluency for At-Risk First Graders

The article Using an iPad App to Improve Sight Word Reading Fluency for At-Risk First

Graders studies the effect of an iPad app on first grade English Language Learners (ELLs) sight

word fluency and oral reading fluency. The authors, Shobana Musti-Rao, Ya-yo Lo, and Erin

Plati, conducted two different studies using the educational app, The Sight Words: Kids Learn

App. In one study, the iPad app was teacher-directed and in the second study, the iPad instruction

was self-meditated.

The study took place in a first-grade classroom in the Northeast of the United States. The

school is considered suburban, though it has urban characteristics. All of the students who

participated in both studies were chosen to use an educational app on the iPad. The app was

called The Sight Words: Kids Learn App where 300 sight words from Fry’s list was included.

The students who participated in the study were in the same class and had the same teacher. In

both studies, the dependent variables were sight word reading fluency and oral reading fluency.
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 13

In the first study, three students participated for 13 weeks. Two students were male and

one was female, but all were ELLs. Their ages were between 6 years 4 months and 6 years 10

months. All three participants were considered “at risk” based off of the winter benchmark

assessments of the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills Oral Reading Fluency

measure (DORF; Good & Kaminski, 2007). All three of the students also scored below

benchmark on a district-administered sight word test. This test was untimed and consisted of 100

sight words. Because these students were considered “at-risk” for reading failure, they were

chosen to participate in the study. The students chosen to complete study one were in a group

that was directed by the teacher, Ms. B. These students were pulled for ten minute sessions, three

times per week. During each session, the students worked on the same set of five words. The

students were asked to “listen to the word, say the word, write the word, say the word, record the

word, listen to the recorded word, repeat the word, and then move to the next word” (Musti-Yao,

Lo, & Plati, 2015, p. 158). If a student wasn’t able to complete one of the steps correctly, then

the teacher redirected the participant to correct their error. The following week, the five words

were used as a review and they were given five new words to practice for the week.

In the second study, three students were chosen to participate for 12 weeks. The

three students consisted of two males and one female who were between the ages of 6 years 3

months and 7 years 3 months. Like the students in the first study, these students were in the “at

risk” levels on their reading assessments. These students used the same app on the iPad, but did

not receive direct teacher instruction. Instead, they were given a folder containing materials that

would help assist them in utilizing the program. They were asked to complete each session on

their own and complete a log which included the words they practiced, the date, and the teacher’s

signature. They were expected to use the app for ten minutes a session, three times a week.
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 14

Instead of studying the same five words for one week like the students in study one, students in

the second study were presented with five different words each session; however, similar to

study one, students were asked to practice the words in the same way. At the end of each

instructional cycle, participants were able to play a game to reinforce the skills they practiced.

The data were analyzed in similar ways. After each week, the participants were given the

same assessments. The first assessment they were given was to assess the number of sight words

they could read correctly within one minute. The second assessment given was to assess the

participants’ oral reading fluency. The researchers administered “the oral reading fluency

progress monitoring probes from DORF” (Musti-Yao, Lo, & Plati, 2015, p. 156) in hopes of

increasing students’ oral reading fluency. The researchers predicted that if their sight word

reading fluency increased, then their oral reading fluency would increase as well. The results

from each assessment was calculated in order to determine results.

In both studies, the researchers concluded similar results. The weekly probes proved that

in both studies, the students’ sight word fluency increased. All of the participants improved their

sight word reading fluency, whether they received teacher-directed or self-mediated instruction

on the iPad. Even though the students increased their sight word fluency, five of the six students

continued to “perform below grade level in oral reading fluency at the end of the study” (Musti-

Yao, Lo, & Plati, 2015, p.164). Researchers concluded that even though the participants

increased their sight word reading fluency, they read these words in isolation, so it was difficult

for students to transfer these skills when given a passage with other words that may be

challenging to decode.

Technology Infusion in Success for All: Reading Outcomes for First Graders
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 15

In the study, Technology Infusion in Success for All: Reading Outcomes for First

Graders, the researchers, Bette Chambers, Robert E. Slavin, Nancy A. Madden, Philip C.

Abrami, Bradley J. Tucker, Alan Cheung, and Richard Gifford (2008), “evaluated the combined

effects of the Reading Reels embedded multimedia content and the Alphie’s Alley computer-

assisted tutoring model” (p. 8). The researchers believed that the use of embedded multimedia

and the computer-assisted tutoring program would increase their word identification, reading

fluency, and comprehension on several different reading achievement tests.

The participants chosen for this study were 159 first graders from two multitrack schools

that utilized the Success for All program. Both schools were made up of a variety of ethnic and

diverse cultures. The sole differentiation factor in this study was the use of technology in lessons.

Seventy-five students received multimedia infused instruction and 84 received regular instruction

without the use of technology. In addition to the embedded multimedia in instruction, the 60

lowest-scoring first graders received additional computer-assisted tutoring based on the

diagnostic test given. The pretest given was the Woodcock Letter-Word Identification in order to

assess the ability to read isolated words and letters. The experimental group consisted of

instruction with the Success for All program with embedded multimedia, Reading Reels.

Reading Reels is a series of videos that utilize short skits to teach various levels of phonemic

awareness, reading strategies, and important vocabulary concepts. The additional students who

qualified for the computer-assisted tutoring received the 20-minute tutoring sessions with the

program, Alphie’s Alley. This program focuses on individual success with phonemic awareness,

phonics, fluency, and comprehension. The control group included daily tutoring for 20-minutes

without technology. The only difference between the control group and the experimental group
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 16

was the use or nonuse of technology. The participants took the pretest in September 2004 and

took the posttest in May 2005. This study was conducted for eight months.

The posttests administered were Woodcock Letter-Word Identification, Woodcock Word

Attack, Gray Oral Reading Test- Fluency, Gray Oral Reading Test- Comprehension, and Gray

Oral Reading Test- Total. Overall, these assessments evaluated letter and word recognition,

phonics skills, reading fluency, comprehension, and fluency and comprehension correlations,

respectively. The researchers analyzed the data using “analyses of covariance, controlling for

letter-word identification pretest scores” (Chambers, Slavin, Madden, Abrami, Tucker, Cheung,

& Gifford, 2008, p. 10.)

The findings concluded that there was no significant difference between the experimental

and control students at the pretest stage. However, at the posttest stage, the experimental group

who received the multimedia embedded instruction had higher mean scores overall compared to

the control group. The participants who also received the Alphie’s Alley tutoring program

“caught up to their grade level faster than those in the control group…” (Chambers, Slavin,

Madden, Abrami, Tucker, Cheung, & Gifford, 2008, p. 11). The researchers concluded that using

technology in the classroom to assist instruction can improve reading performance for at-risk

first graders.

Reading electronic books as a support for vocabulary, story comprehension and word reading

in kindergarten and first grade

In the study, Reading electronic books as a support for vocabulary, story comprehension

and word reading in kindergarten and first grade, the effect of reading an electronic storybook

as opposed to the traditional text was assessed in kindergarten and first-grade students. Ofra
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 17

Korat hypothesized that the participants in the experimental group would benefit from reading

the e-book compared to the control group, who received only the regular kindergarten/first grade

instruction.

The researcher included 90 Israeli children from five kindergarten and five first grade

classes from a variety of schools all located in middle socioeconomic status neighborhoods. The

children were randomly assigned to either the experimental or control groups. The researcher

was able to do this because the study took place within the general education classroom

setting. The control groups simply received only the regular classroom instruction while the

experimental groups were pulled 5 separate times for an e-book reading session which lasted 20-

25 minutes. While working with the e-book, the children were given technical support if needed,

but were not given any other adult support. When reading on the e-book, the children used the

mode where the story was read by an actor, had dramatic story details added, and allowed the

reader to use the dictionary tool.

Prior to the study, all students, both in the experimental and control groups, were given a

pretest that assessed vocabulary and word meaning. The vocabulary and word reading of the e-

book’s target words were measured before and after the reading of the story, but story

comprehension was only measured after the activity. To assess vocabulary, the participants were

asked for the meaning of 10 words which were able to be found in the dictionary mode of the e-

book. The total score was out of 10. To evaluate word reading, the children were asked to read 9

words which all appear with high frequency within the story. The scores were ranged from 1 to

4, with the score of 4 meaning the word was read correctly and 1 meaning the participant read

another word or didn’t know the word. In order to assess story comprehension, students were

asked eight right or wrong questions relating to the e-book. Each correct answer was given a
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 18

score of 1, so the total assessment was out of 8. Korat analyzed the data by looking at the mean

scores and standard deviations between the pre and post literacy results.

The researcher found that the experimental group improved their word meaning and word

reading and the scores were greater in the experimental group than in the control group. In

regards to story comprehension, the researcher noted that there was no significant difference

between the kindergarten and first grade age groups’ scores, but, the difference between the

experimental and control groups was not included. Overall, the results confirmed the researcher’s

hypothesis that children would benefit from reading the e-book compared to the group who only

received regular classroom instruction.

The Efficacy of Computer-Assisted Instruction for Advancing Literacy Skills in Kindergarten

Children

In the study, The Efficacy of Computer-Assisted Instruction for Advancing Literacy Skills

in Kindergarten Children, by Paul Macaruso and Adelaide Walker, the benefits of computer-

assisted instruction (CAI) as a supplement to a phonics-based reading curriculum was

examined. In this study, computer-assisted instruction is defined as a computer program called

Early Reading that targets emerging literacy skills including “sound identification, rhyming,

segmenting and blending of sounds, and application of letter-sound correspondences for subsets

of consonants and vowels” (Macaruso & Walker, 2008, p. 270).

This study consisted of students from six different kindergarten classes from two

elementary schools located in an urban community in Boston, Massachusetts. Of the six classes,

three different teachers each taught a morning and afternoon class. Each teacher was randomly

assigned their treatment and control classes. The experimental class used CAI within the general
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 19

education classroom and the control group did not. The students chosen to participate in this

study were from diverse sociocultural backgrounds. There were no special education students or

English language learners present in the sample. The experimental group used the CAI program

2-3 times per week for 15-20 minutes for approximately six months. Both groups used the same

curriculum and scope and sequence of instruction. All participants were pretested in September

2003 using the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, 6th edition (DIBELS). The

subtests given were the initial sound fluency (ISF) and letter naming fluency (LNF). At the end

of the school year in May 2004, the posttest was given. The two subtests within the posttest

were LNF and phoneme segmentation fluency (PSF). The LNF subtest was administered in both

the pre and posttest; however, the PSF was only tested at the end of the study because it was

required in order to follow DIBELS guidelines and was appropriate for the end of kindergarten.

After comparing the DIBELS pre and posttests, the researchers found that there was no

significant difference between the experimental and control groups on the LNF or the PSF

subtests. The researchers thought that the students who used the CAI program in class would

outperform those students who did not; however, this was not the case. The researchers believe

that the students may not have completed enough activities in the CAI program to show

substantial growth.

Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation

After reviewing these articles, we found that overall, there was no difference in fluency

or reading comprehension with the use of e-books as opposed to traditional printed books when

students were simply just reading the text. However, when the tools, such as narration,

highlighted words, dictionary, and musical cues, were available to use when reading on the e-

books, the children’s comprehension increased. When technology and apps were provided for
DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 20

instruction, it was found that the children’s foundational phonics skills improved. These

foundational phonics skills include letter recognition, sight word fluency, and phonemic

awareness. Depending on the type of digital tool provided, students could increase their literacy

skills if used appropriately.

It was also found that overall, students enjoyed reading with the technology over the

traditional printed sources. Computer programs and apps are valuable tools to use in the

classroom because it gives the teacher the ability to customize instruction for each students’

needs. We believe that if students are motivated and engaged in their work, then they are more

likely to be successful in the classroom.

Conclusion

In conclusion, technology and digital tools can be used successfully to help improve

literacy skills in young learners. If used appropriately, technology can enhance students’ learning

in a variety of ways. Educators can use a variety of digital tools as interventions to help students

who are performing below grade level with early reading skills. As technology continues to

advance, teachers should become aware of the digital tools available in order to enhance

students’ literacy skills.

DIGITAL TOOLS & LITERACY SKILLS 21

References

Chambers, B., Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Abrami, P. C., Tucker, B. J., Cheung, A., &
Gifford, R. (2008, September). Technology Infusion in Success for All: Reading
Outcomes for First Graders. The Elementary School Journal, 109(1), 1-15.
doi:10.1086/592364

Dundar, H., & Akcayir, M. (2012). Tablet vs. Paper: The Effect on Learners' Reading
Performance. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(3), 441-450.

Grimshaw, S., Dungworth, N., McKnight, C., & Morris, A. (2007). Electronic books: Children's
reading and comprehension. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 583-599.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00640.x

Korat, O. (2010). Reading electronic books as a support for vocabulary, story comprehension
and word reading in kindergarten and first grade. Computers & Education, 55(1), 24-31.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.014

Macaruso, P., & Walker, A. (2008). The Efficacy of Computer-Assisted Instruction for
Advancing Literacy Skills in Kindergarten Children. Reading Psychology, 29(3), 266-
287. doi:10.1080/02702710801982019

Musti-R, S., Lo, Y., & Plati, E. (2015). Using an iPad App to Improve Sight Word Reading
Fluency for At-Risk First Graders. Remedial and Special Education, 36(3), 154-166.
doi:10.1177/0741932514541485

Pearman, C. J. (2008). Independent Reading of CD-ROM Storybooks: Measuring

Comprehension With Oral Retellings. The Reading Teacher, 61(8), 594-602.
doi:10.1598/RT.61.8.1

Wright, S., Fugett, A., & Caputa, F. (2013). Using E-readers and Internet Resources to Support
Comprehension. Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 367-379.