Reading and Writing

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 107–144 | Cite as

Reading on the computer with orthographic and speech feedback

An overview of the Colorado remediation project
  • Richard K. Olson
  • Barbara W. Wise
Article

Abstract

In this paper we present an overview of a computer program directed toward the remediation of children's deficits in word recognition and phonological decoding. In the present studies, 138 children read stories on the computer, in their school, for a half hour per day during a semester. Children were trained to request synthetic-speech feedback (DECtalk) for difficult words by targeting the words with a mouse. Different groups received whole-word feedback, wherein targeted words were highlighted and spoken as a unit, or segmented feedback, wherein segments of words (onsets, rimes, or syllables) were sequentially highlighted and spoken by the computer, requiring the child to pay attention to and blend the segments. Both whole-word and segmented feedback resulted in almost twice the gains in standardized word recognition scores compared to control groups that spent an equal time in their normal remedial reading program. Most important, the computer-trained groups improved their phonological decoding of nonwords at about four times the rate of the control group. However, there was a significant interaction between level of deficit severity and optimal feedback condition. The most severely disabled readers showed the largest phonological decoding gains from syllable feedback, while the largest gains for the less severely disabled readers were from onset-rime feedback. The disabled readers' level of phonological awareness at pre-test was the strongest predictor for gains in word recognition and phonological decoding. Implications of the results for future training programs are discussed.

Keywords

Computer-based remediation Individual differences Phonological awareness Reading disability Synthetic-speech feedback 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alexander, A. W., Anderson, H. G., Heilman, P. C., Voeller, K. S. & Torgesen, J. K. (1991). Phonological awareness training and remediation of analytic decoding deficits in a group of severe dyslexics,Annals of Dyslexia 41: 193–206.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, E. W. & Blachman, B. A. (1988). Phoneme segmentation training: Effect on reading readiness,Annals of Dyslexia 38: 208–225.Google Scholar
  3. Barron, R. W., Golden, J. O., Seldon, D. W., Tait, C. F. & Marmurek, H. C. (1990). Training prereading skills with DECtalk: Evidence for a bidirectional causal relationship between phonological awareness and literacy. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association meetings, 16–20 April 1990.Google Scholar
  4. Besner, D., Twilley, L., McCann, R. S. & Seergobin, K., (1990). On the association between connectionism and data: Are a few words necessary?,Psychological Review 97: 432–446.Google Scholar
  5. Boder, E. & Jarrico, S. (1982). The Boder test of reading-spelling patterns: A diagnostic screening test for subtypes of reading disability. New York: Grune & Stratton.Google Scholar
  6. Bradley, L. & Bryant, P. (1983). Categorizing sounds and learning to read,Nature 271: 746–747.Google Scholar
  7. Campbell, R. & Butterworth, B. (1985). Phonologocal dyslexia and dysgraphia in a highly literat subject: A developmental case with associated deficits of phonemic processing and awareness,Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 37: 435–475.Google Scholar
  8. Conners, F. & Olson, R. K. (1990). Reading comprehension in dyslexic and normal readers: A component skills analysis, pp. 557–579, in: D. A. Balota, G. B. Flores d'Arcais & K. Rayner (eds.),Comprehension processes in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. DeFries, J. C., Olson, R. K., Pennington, B. F. & Smith, S. D. (1991). Colorado reading project: An update, pp. 58–87, in: D. Duane & D. Gray (eds.),The reading brain: The biological basis of dyslexia. Parkton, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
  10. Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R. & Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction,Review of Educational Research 61 (2): 239–264.Google Scholar
  11. Dunn, L. M & Markwardt, F. C. (1970).Examiner's manual: Peabody Individual Achievement Test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
  12. Fox, B. & Routh, D. (1980). Phonemic analysis and severe reading disability in children,Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 9: 115–119.Google Scholar
  13. Goodman, K. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game,Journal of the Reading Specialist 6: 126–136.Google Scholar
  14. Jorm, A. F. & Share, D. L. (1983). Phonological recording and reading acquisition,Applied Psycholinguistics 4: 103–147.Google Scholar
  15. Liberman, A. M., Cooper, F. S., Shankweiler, D. P. & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the speech code,Psychological Review 74: 431–461.Google Scholar
  16. Liberman, I. Y. (1983). A language oriented view of reading and its disabilities, in: H. Myklebust (ed.),Progress in learning disabilities, Vol. 5. New York: Grunbe & Stratton.Google Scholar
  17. Lindamood, C. H. & Lindamood, P. C. (1969).Auditory discrimination in depth. Boston, MA: Teaching Resources.Google Scholar
  18. Lindamood, C. H. & Lindamood, P. C. (1979).Lindamood auditory conceptualization test. Hingham, MA: Teaching Resources Corporation.Google Scholar
  19. Lundberg, I., Frost, J. & Petersen, O. (1988). Effects of an extensive program for stimulating phonological awareness in preschool children,Reading Research Quarterly 23: 263–284.Google Scholar
  20. Lyon, G. R. (1985). Educational validation studies, pp. 228–253, in: B. P. Rourke (ed.),Neuropsychology of Learning Disabilities New York: Guslford Publications.Google Scholar
  21. Marsh, G., Friedman, M., Welch, V. & Desberg, P. (1981). A cognitive-developmental theory of reading acquisition, in: G. E. MacKinnon and T. G. Waller (eds.),Reading research: Advances in theory and practice, Vol. 3. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  22. Olson, R. K. (1985). Disabled reading processes and cognitive profiles, pp. 215–244, in: D. Gray and J. Kavanagh (eds.),Biobehavioral Measures of Dyslexia. Parkton, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
  23. Olson, R., Foltz, G. & Wise, B. (1986). Reading instruction and remediation with the aid of computer speech,Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 18: 93–99.Google Scholar
  24. Olson, R. K., Gillis, J. J., Rack, J. P., DeFries, J. C. & Fulker, D. W. (1991). Confirmatory factor analysis of word recognition and process measures in the Colorado Reading Project.Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 3: 235–248.Google Scholar
  25. Olson, R. K. & Wise, B. (1987). Computer speech in reading instruction, pp. 156–177, in: D. Reinking (ed.),Computers and reading: Issues for theory and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  26. Olson, R. K. & Wise, B. (1990). Reading whole text with computer-speech feedback for disabled readers. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association Meetings, 16–20 April 1990, in a symposium titled ‘Using computer-generated speech to teach reading skills: Current research and future directions’.Google Scholar
  27. Olson, R. K., Wise, B., Conners, F. & Rack, J. (1990). Organization, heritability, and remediation of component word recognition and language skills in disabled readers, pp. 261–322, in: In T. H. Carr and B. A. Levy (eds.),Reading and its development: Component skills approaches. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  28. Olson, R. K., Wise, B., Conners, F., Rack, J. & Fulker, D. (1989). Specific deficits in component reading and language skills: Genetic and environmental influences,Journal of Learning Disabilities 22: 339–348.Google Scholar
  29. Perfetti, C. A. (1985).Reading Ability. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  30. Rack, J. P., Snowling, M. J. & Olson, R. I. (in press). The nonword reading deficit in developmental dyslexia: a review,Reading Research Quarterly.Google Scholar
  31. Reitsma, P. (1983). Word-specific knowledge in beginning reading,Journal of Research in Reading 6: 41–56.Google Scholar
  32. Rosner, J. (1971).Phonic analysis training and beginning reading skills. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Learning Research and Development Center (Publication Series).Google Scholar
  33. Rozin, P. & Gleitman, L. R. (1977). The structure and acquisition of reading, II: The reading process and the acquisition of the alphabetic principle, pp. 55–151, in: A. S. Reber & D. L. Scarborough (eds.),Toward a psychology of reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. Seidenberg, M. S. & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming,Psychological Review 96: 523–568.Google Scholar
  35. Spaai, G. W. G., Reitsma, P. & Ellermann, H. H. (1991). Effects of segmented and wholeword sound feedback on learning to read single words,Journal of Educational Research 84: 204–213.Google Scholar
  36. Spoehr, K. T. & Smith, E. E. (1973). The role of syllables in perceptual processes.Cognitive Psychology 5: 71–89.Google Scholar
  37. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Cognitive processes and the reading problems of learning disabled children: Evaluating the assumption of specificity, in: J. K. Torgesen & B. Y. L. Wong (eds.),Psychological and educational perspectives on learning disabilities. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  38. Taft, M. (1979). Lexical access via an orthographic code: The Basic Orthographic Syllabic Structure (BOSS),Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18: 21–39.Google Scholar
  39. Treiman, R. (1983). The structure of spoken syllables: Evidence from novel word games,Cognition 15: 49–74.Google Scholar
  40. Wagner, R. & Torgesen, J. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills,Psychological Bulletin 101: 192–212.Google Scholar
  41. Wechsler, D. (1974).Examiner's manual: Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised. New York: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  42. Wise, B. W. (1987). Word segmentation in computerized reading instruction,Dissertation Abstracts (University of Colorado at Boulder).Google Scholar
  43. Wise, B. W. (in press). Whole words versus phonics for short-term learning: Comparisons on a talking computer system.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology.Google Scholar
  44. Wise, B. W. & Olson, R. K. (1991). Remediating reading disabilities, pp. 631–658, in: J. E. Obrzut and G. W. Hynd (eds.),Neuropsychological foundations of learning disabilities. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  45. Wise, B. W. & Olson, R. K. (1992). How poor readers and spellers use interactive speech in a computerized spelling program,Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 4: 145–163 (this issue).Google Scholar
  46. Wise, B. W., Olson, R. K. & Treiman, R. (1990). Sub-syllabic units as aids in beginning readers' word learning: Onset-rime vs. post-vowel segmentation,Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 49: 1–19.Google Scholar
  47. Wise, B. W., OLson, R. K., Anstett, M., Andrews, L., Terjak, M., Schneider, V., Kostuch, J. & Kriho, L. (1989). Implementing a long-term computerized remedial reading program with synthetic speech feedback: Hardware, software, and real world issues,Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 21: 173–180.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard K. Olson
    • 1
  • Barbara W. Wise
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Colorado at BoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations