Student Test Scores Improved in an English Literature Course through the Use of Supportive Devices

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  1. Borich, G. D. (2000). Effective teaching methods (44th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1984). Teacher behavior and student achievement. Occasional paper no. 73. East Lansing, MI: East Lansing Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University.

  3. Charles, D. F. (1991). Implementing a program using zoological treasure hunt to enhance word attack skills of low performing first grade students. Fort Lauderdale, FL: Nova University. (ERICDocument Reproduction Service No. ED 338 584)

  4. Christie, K. (2001). Oh, no! not Texas again! Phi Delta Kappan, 83(1), 5–6.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Clark, K. D. (2000). Urban middle school teachers’ use of instructional technology. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 178–196.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hasselbring, T. S., Goin, L., Taylor, R., Bottage, B., & Daley, D. (1997). The computer doesn’t embarrass me. Educational Leadership, 55(3), 30–33.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kajder, S. B. (2003). The tech-savvy English classroom. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.

  8. Maslin, J. E., & Nelson, M. E. (2002). Peering into the future: Students using technology to create literacy products. The Reading Teacher, 55(7), 628–639.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Merkley, D. J., Schmidt, D. A., & Allen, G. (2001). Addressing the English language arts technology standard in a secondary reading methodology course. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(3), 220–231.

    Google Scholar 

  10. National Council of Teachers of English. (1996). Standards for the English language arts. Retrieved January 10, 2005, from

  11. Norris, C., Soloway, E., & Sullivan, T. (2002). Examining 25 years of technology in U.S. education. Communications of the ACM, 45(8), 15–18.

  12. Potter, L., & Small, J. (1998). Utilizing computers for reading improvement in a junior high: A case study. International Journal of Instructional Media, 25(4), 383–387.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Riley, R. W., Holleman, F. S., & Roberts, L. G. (2000). The national educational technology plan: Putting a world-class education at the fingertips of all children. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

  14. Shiah, R. L., Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. (1995). Computer-assited instruction and students with learning disabilities: Does research support the rhetoric? Advances in Learning and Behavioral Disabilities, 9, 161–192.

    Google Scholar 

  15. U.S. Department of Education. (2001). Enhancing Education Through Technology Act of 2001. Retrieved April 25, 2006, from

  16. Wepner, S. B., & Tao, L. (2002). From master teacher to master novice: Shifting responsibilities in technology-infused classrooms. Reading Teacher, 55(7), 642–652.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 807–840.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert M. Maninger.

Additional information

Dr. Robert M. Maninger is an instructor of technology applications in the School of Education at Texas Christian University. His interests include technology integration, educational foundations and school administration. Dr. Maninger has taught at the secondary and university level, and has been both an elementary and secondary administrator.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Maninger, R.M. Student Test Scores Improved in an English Literature Course through the Use of Supportive Devices. TECHTRENDS TECH TRENDS 50, 37–45 (2006).

Download citation


  • Technology Integration
  • Passing Rate
  • Reading Test
  • TechTrends Volume
  • Remote Device