Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Learning technologies for adult literacy: a scoping review and analysis of the current state of evidence

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Educational technology research and development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This scoping review of research explores the use of educational technologies for adult literacy, specifically for those with low literacy skills. The sample explores research published since 2010 across four major databases, yielding 21 relevant peer-reviewed articles published through the end of 2020. Half of the final included studies were conducted in North America (12 in US and 1 in Canada), and 8 were conducted in other countries around the world. Technology interventions ranged greatly across 15 separate interventions identified, allowing for little to no comparison. Methodologies and quality ranged significantly, with data mining, descriptive surveys, and quasi-experimental designs as the most predominant methods. Instructional strategies ranged greatly as well, from gamification to practice to direct instruction to word highlights. Among the included studies, there is one educational technology that has been studied extensively enough to suggest readiness for scalable implementation and randomized control trials along with promising early results from other interventions. Findings from the scoping review indicate that establishing a research agenda and community in this space, along with future studies detailing participant literacy levels and instructional design features with greater precision, as well as explicitly corresponding design to literacy skills, are significant ways in which educational technology researchers and developers could further the work on this important educational problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

*Final included studies in this scoping review

  • *Aker, J. C., Ksoll, C., & Lybbert, T. J. (2012). Can mobile phones improve learning? Evidence from a field experiment in Niger. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 4(4), 94–120. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.4.4.94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alamprese, J. A., MacArthur, C. A., Price, C., & Knight, D. (2011). Effects of a structured decoding curriculum on adult literacy learners’ reading development. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4(2), 154–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2011.555294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belzer, A., & St. Clair, R. (2007). The world touches the classroom: Using “anthropolicy” to understand political, economic, and social effects on adult literacy education. In B. Guzzetti (Ed.), Literacy for the new millennium,4: Adult literacy (pp. 17–35). Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Browne, K., & Anand, C. (2018). An empirical evaluation of reading comprehension tablet software utilizing the question generation strategy. Journal of Literacy & Technology, 19(2), 2–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Calvo-Ferrer, J. R. (2017). Educational games as stand-alone learning tools and their motivational effect on L2 vocabulary acquisition and perceived learning gains. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 264–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cervetti, G., Damico, J., & Pearson, P. D. (2010). Multiple literacies, new literacies, and teacher education. Theory into Practice, 45(4), 378–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Chen, S., Lippert, A., Shi, G., Fang, Y., & Graesser, A. C. (2018). Disengagement detection within an intelligent tutoring system. [Grantee Submission, 1–8]. ERIC

  • *Chen, S., Fang, Y., Shi, G., Sabatini, J., Greenberg, D., Frijters, J., & Graesser, A. C. (2021). Automated disengagement tracking within an intelligent tutoring system. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 3, 595627. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2020.595627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Chib, A., & Wardoyo, R. J. (2018). Differential OER impacts of formal and informal ICTs: Employability of female migrant workers. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 19(3), 94–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R., & Mayer, R. (2016). e-Learning and the science of instruction (4th ed.). Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Colquhoun, H. L., Levac, D., O’Brien, K. K., Straus, S., Tricco, A. C., Perrier, L., Kastner, M., & Moher, D. (2014). Scoping reviews: Time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(12), 1291–1294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daudt, H. M., van Mossel, C., & Scott, S. J. (2013). Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-48

  • *Deshpande, A., Desrochers, A., Ksoll, C., & Shonchoy, A. S. (2017). The impact of a computer-based adult literacy program on literacy and numeracy: Evidence from India. World Development, 96, 451–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.03.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirkx, J., & Jha, L. (1994). Completion and attrition in adult basic education: A test of two pragmatic prediction models. Adult Education Quarterly, 45, 269–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Fang, Y., Lippert, A., Cai, Z., Chen, S., Frijters, J. C., Greenberg, D., & Graesser, A. C. (2021). Patterns of adults with low literacy skills interacting with an intelligent tutoring system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00266-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Fang, Y., Shubeck, K., Lippert, A., Cheng, Q., Shi, G., Feng, S., Gatewood, J., Chen, S., Cai, Z., Pavlik, P., Frijters, J., Greenberg, D., & Graesser, A. (2018). Clustering the learning patterns of adults with low literacy skills interacting with an intelligent tutoring system. International Educational Data Mining Society, 1–7

  • Graesser, A., Greenberg, D., Olney, A., & Lovett, M. (2020). Educational technologies that support reading comprehension for adults who have low literacy skills. In D. Perin (Ed.), The Wiley handbook of adult literacy (pp. 471–493). Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, D. (2008). The challenges facing adult literacy programs. Community Literacy Journal, 3, 39–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, D., Wise, J. C., Morris, R., Fredrick, L. D., Rodrigo, V., Nanda, A. O., & Pae, H. K. (2011). A randomized control study of instructional approaches for struggling adult readers. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4(2), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2011.555288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Hill, J. R. (2018). Algorithmic generation and mobile distribution of phonetic, orthographic, and inference-based literacy exercises for adult learners [Doctoral Dissertation, George Washington University]. ProQuest Information & Learning.

  • Hock, M. F., & Mellard, D. F. (2011). Efficacy of learning strategies instruction in adult education. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4(2), 134–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2011.555291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Housel, D. A., & Oranjian, N. (2021). A case study of the use of Newsela PRO among adult, emergent bi/multilingual learners in a precollege program. Adult Learning, 32(2), 59–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Igwe, N. J., Kadiri, G. C., & Ekwueme, J. (2020). Impact of information and communication technology on acquiring the literacy skills outside the classroom among adults in Nsukka Urban. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 11(6), 881–892.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Johnson, A. M., Guerrero, T. A., Tighe, E. L., & McNamara, D. S. (2017). iSTART-ALL: Confronting adult low literacy with intelligent tutoring for reading comprehension. [Grantee Submission, 1–13]. ERIC.

  • Kimmons, R. (2020). Current trends (and missing links) in educational technology research and practice. TechTrends, 64(6), 803–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, M., Holton, E., & Swanson, R. (2015). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (8th ed.). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ksoll, C., Aker, J., Miller, D., Perez, K. and Smalley, S. (2014). Learning without teachers? Evidence from a randomized experiment of a mobile phone-based adult education program in Los Angeles. Poverty Action Lab. https://www.povertyactionlab.org/evaluation/learning-without-teachers-evidence-randomized-experiment-mobile-phone-based-adult

  • Kutner, M., Greenberg, E., Jin, Y., Boyle, B., Hsu, Y., & Dunleavy, E. (2007). Literacy in everyday life: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2007–480). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. http://nces.ed.gov/Pubs2007/2007480.pdf

  • Kutner, M., Greenberg, E., Jin, Y., & Paulsen, C. (2006). The health literacy of American adults: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006–483). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/2006483.pdf

  • Malicky, G., & Norman, C. (1994). Participation patterns in adult literacy programs. Adult Basic Education, 3(3), 144–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mamedova, S. & Pawlowski, E. (2019). Data point: Adult literacy in the United States. U. S. Department of Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED596118.pdf

  • Mamedova, S., Sparks, D., & Mulvaney Hoyer, K. (2017). Stats in brief. Adult education attainment and assessment Scores: A cross-national comparison. U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018007.pdf

  • McCarthy, K. S., Watanabe, M., Dai, J., & McNamara, D. S. (2020). Personalized learning in iSTART: Past modifications and future design. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(3), 301–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1716201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *McCulley, Y., Gillespie, C., & Murr, A. H. (2014). Assessing the effectiveness of text-to-speech software in incarcerated adult literacy education. Journal of Correctional Education, 65(2), 2–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • *McGrail, E., Sachs, G. T., Ellison, T. L., Dukes, N., & Zackery, K. (2018). Homeless adults, technology and literacy practices. Journal of Literacy & Technology, 19(2), 50–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miake-Lye, I. M., Hempel, S., Shanman, R., & Shekelle, P. G. (2016). What is an evidence map? A systematic review of published evidence maps and their definitions, methods, and products. Systematic Reviews, 5(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0204-x

  • Miller, B., Esposito, L., & McCardle, P. (2011). A public health approach to improving the lives of adult learners: Introduction to the special issue on adult literacy interventions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4(2), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2011.555287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C. D., Greenberg, D., Hendrick, R. C., & Nanda, A. (2017). Educational attainment: Limited implications for adult literacy learners. Journal of Research and Practice for Adult Literacy, Secondary, and Basic Education, 6(2), 21–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Nash-Ditzel, S., & Brown, T. (2012). Freedoms in the classroom: Cultivating a successful third space for literacy growth. Language & Literacy: A Canadian Educational E-Journal, 14(3), 95–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). U.S. state and county estimates resources. https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/piaac/state-county-estimates.asp

  • *Nedungadi, P., Devenport, K., Sutcliffe, R., & Raman, R. (2020). Towards a digital learning ecology to address the grand challenge in adult literacy. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1789668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, M. B. (2018). The forgotten 90%: Adult nonparticipation in education. Adult Education Quarterly, 68(1), 41–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickard, A. (2016). WIOA: Implications for low-scoring adult learners. COABE Journal, 5(2), 50. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1125478

  • Pickard, A. (2019). Barriers to access in public adult literacy education. Educational Policy, 35(5), 721–747. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904819843602

  • *Pinto, A. (2014). Networked Learning: Designing for adult literacy learners. Literacy & Numeracy Studies, 22(1), 21–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ProLiteracy. (2021). Annual member statistical report. Retrieved February 4, 2022, from https://www.proliteracy.org/Resources-Publications/Media-Kit/Statistical-Report

  • Reeves, T., & Lin, L. (2020). The research we have is not the research we need. Educational Technology Research & Development, 68, 1991–2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, T. C., & Reeves, P. M. (2015). Educational technology research in a VUCA world. Educational Technology, 55(2), 26–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, D. J., & Vanek, J. B. (2017). Technology for innovation and change in adult basic skills education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 155, 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.20240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatini, J. P., Shore, J., Holtzman, S., & Scarborough, H. S. (2011). Relative effectiveness of reading intervention programs for adults with low literacy. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4(2), 118–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2011.555290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Semali, L. M., & Asino, T. I. (2014). Postliteracy in the digital age: The use of mobile phones to support literacy practices in Namibia and Tanzania. Prospects-UNESCO, 44(1), 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Shang, H.-F. (2015). An investigation of scaffolded reading on EFL hypertext comprehension. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(3), 239–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Shi, G., Lippert, A. M., Shubeck, K., Fang, Y., Chen, S., Pavlik, P., Greenberg, D., & Graesser, A. C. (2018). Exploring an intelligent tutoring system as a conversation-based assessment tool for reading comprehension. Behaviormetrika, 45(2), 615–633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41237-018-0065-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Shi, G., Pavlik, P., Jr., & Graesser, A. (2017). Using an additive factor model and performance factor analysis to assess learning gains in a tutoring system to help adults with reading difficulties. [Grantee Submission, 1–2]. ERIC.

  • Snilstveit, B., Vojtkova, M., Bhavsar, A., & Gaarder, M. (2013). Evidence gap maps—A tool for promoting evidence-informed policy and prioritizing future research. Independent Evaluation Group, Public Sector Evaluation Department.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, I. (2000). Literacy and technology studies: Past, present, future. Australian Educational Researcher, 27(2), 97–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics. (2021, June). Literacy. Unesco.Org. Retrieved October 18, 2021, from http://uis.unesco.org/en/topic/literacy#slideoutsearch

  • U.S. Department of Education. (NCES 2020–777). Highlights of the 2017 U.S. PIAAC Results Web Report. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/piaac/current_results.asp.

  • Warschauer, M. & Liaw, M.-L. (2010). Emerging technologies in adult literacy and language education. National Institute for Literacy. ED511970

  • Young, P. A., & Asino, T. I. (2020). Cultural implications in educational technology: A survey. In M. J. Bishop, E. Boling, J. Elen, & V. Svihla (Eds.), Handbook of research in educational communications and technology (pp. 263–283). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36119-8_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by funding from the Barbara Bush Foundation for Family Literacy.

Funding

This work was supported by funding from the Barbara Bush Foundation for Family Literacy and the Dollar General Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, USA

    Stephanie L. Moore, Olivia Baca & Charis Ahrens

Authors
  1. Stephanie L. Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Olivia Baca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Charis Ahrens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephanie L. Moore.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There are no known conflicts of interest to disclose.

Research involving human and animal rights

This research does not involve human participants and/or animals. Because this research does not involve human subjects, informed consent was not necessary.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moore, S.L., Baca, O. & Ahrens, C. Learning technologies for adult literacy: a scoping review and analysis of the current state of evidence. Education Tech Research Dev 71, 2195–2219 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10270-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10270-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation