Dyslexic students’ experiences in using assistive technology to support written language skills: a five-year follow-up

References

• Rose J. Identifying and teaching children and young people with dyslexia and literacy difficulties: Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF); 2009. Available from: http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/id/eprint/14790.
   Google Scholar
• Snowling MJ, Hulme C, Nation K. Defining and understanding dyslexia: past, present and future. Oxf Rev Educ. 2020;46(4):501–513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livingston EM, Siegel LS, Ribary U. Developmental dyslexia: emotional impact and consequences. Aust J Learn Difficulties. 2018;23(2):107–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura A. Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educ Psychol. 1993;28(2):117–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt M, Bremner A, Sutherland E, et al. Psychology: the science of mind and behavior. New York (NY): McGrawHill; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Unrau NJ, Rueda R, Son E, et al. Can reading self-efficacy be modified? a meta-analysis of the impact of interventions on reading self-efficacy. Rev Educ Res. 2018;88(2):167–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tunmer W, Greaney K. Defining dyslexia. J Learn Disabil. 2010;43(3):229–243.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SBU. Dyslexi hos barn och ungdomar – tester och insatser: En systematisk litteraturöversikt. Statens Beredning för Medicinsk Utvärdering. Swedish Council on Health Technology Assessment; 2014. No 225. Available from: https://www.sbu.se/sv/publikationer/SBU-utvarderar/dyslexi-hos-barn-och-ungdomar–-tester-och-insatser/.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson RL, Pennington BF. Developmental dyslexia. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2015;11:283–307.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramus F, Rosen S, Dakin SC, et al. Theories of developmental dyslexia: insights from a multiple case study of dyslexic adults. Brain. 2003;126(Pt 4):841–865.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Snowling MJ. Dyslexia: a language learning impairment. JBA. 2014;2(1):43–58.
   Google Scholar
• Snowling MJ, Melby-Lervåg M. Oral language deficits in familial dyslexia: a meta-analysis and review. Psychol Bull. 2016;142(5):498–545.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brimo K, Dinkler L, Gillberg C, et al. The co‐occurrence of neurodevelopmental problems in dyslexia. Dyslexia. 2021;27(3):277–293.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moll K, Snowling MJ, Hulme C. Introduction to the special issue "comorbidities between reading disorders and other developmental disorders. Sci Stud Read. 2020;24(1):1–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association Publishing. 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Grigorenko E. Developmental dyslexia: an update on genes, brains and environments. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2001;42(1):91–125.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiu YD, Language and Reading Research Consortium. The simple view of reading across development: prediction of grade 3 reading comprehension from prekindergarten skills. Remedial Spec Educ. 2018;39(5):289–303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Block CC, Duffy GG. Research on teaching comprehension: where we’ve been and where we’re going. In CC. Block, SR Parris, editors. Comprehension instruction: research-based best practices. New York (NY): The Guilford Press; 2008. p. 19–37.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson J. Assessing writing. In S Graham, CA MacArthur, M Hebert, editors. Best practices in writing instruction. New York (NY): The Guilford Press; 2019. p. 333–360.
   Google Scholar
• Ewoldt KB. Productivity apps supporting higher order writing skills for secondary students with learning disabilities. Interv Sch Clin. 2018;53(5):313–320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edyburn DL. Expanding the use of assistive technology while mindful of the need to understand efficacy. In Edyburn D, editor. Efficacy of assistive technology interventions. Bingley: Emerald Group, 2015. p. 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• ISO. Information technology — Interoperability with assistive technology (AT) – part 1: requirements and recommendations for interoperability. ISO/IEC 13066-1; 2011. Available from: https://www.iso.org/standard/53770.html.
   Google Scholar
• Edyburn DL. Universal usability and universal design for learning. Interv Sch Clin. 2021;56(5):310–315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erstad O, Kjällander S, Järvelä S. Facing the challenges of ‘digital competence’ a Nordic agenda for curriculum development for the 21st century. NJDL. 2021;16(2):77–87.
   Google Scholar
• National Agency for Education. Skolverkets uppföljning av Digitaliseringsstrategin 2021; 2022. Available from: https://www.skolverket.se/publikationer?id=9385.
   Google Scholar
• Singh A, Alexander PA. Audiobooks, print, and comprehension: what we know and what we need to know. Educ Psychol Rev. 2022;34(2):677–715.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perelmutter B, McGregor KK, Gordon KR. Assistive technology interventions for adolescents and adults with learning disabilities: an evidence-based systematic review and meta-analysis. Comput Educ. 2017;114:139–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood SG, Moxley JH, Tighe EL, et al. Does use of text-to-speech and related read-aloud tools improve reading comprehension for students with reading disabilities? A meta-analysis. J Learn Disabil. 2018;51(1):73–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berner K, Alves AN. A scoping review of literature using speech recognition technologies by individuals with disabilities in multiple contexts. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2021;Published Online: 20 Oct 2021:1–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordström T, Nilsson S, Gustafson S, et al. Assistive technology applications for students with reading difficulties: special education teachers’ experiences and perceptions. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2018;0(0):1–11.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Svensson I, Nordström T, Lindeblad E, et al. Effects of assistive technology for students with reading and writing disabilities. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2021;16(2):196–208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiang HY, Liu CH. Evaluation of the benefits of assistive reading software: perceptions of high school students with learning disabilities. Assist Technol. 2011;23(4):199–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milrad MB. Studenter med läs -och skrivsvårigheter som deltagare i högre utbildning (Publication No. 29/2010) [doctoral dissertation]. Linneaus University, Linnaeus University Press; Växjö, Sweden, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Draffan EA, Evans DG, Blenkhorn P. Use of assistive technology by students with dyslexia in post-secondary education. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2007;2(2):105–116.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dodge KM. Examining the lived experience of students with reading comprehension learning disabilities and the perceived value of the accommodations received [Ph.D. thesis]. Toledo, USA: The University of Toledo; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Kraft S, Thurfjell F, Rack J, et al. Lexikala analyser av muntlig, tangentbordsskriven och dikterad text producerad av barn med stavningssvårigheter. NJLR. 2019;5(3):102.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson LM, Reynolds TW. Jr Speech recognition, disability, and college composition. JPED. 2015;28(2):181–197.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts KD, Stodden RA. The use of voice recognition software as a compensatory strategy for postsecondary education students receiving services under the category of learning disabled. J Voc Rehabil. 2005;22(1):49–64.
   Google Scholar
• Björn M, Svensson I. Exploring an interventions’ impact on everyday school activities. Support Learn. 2021;36(1):5–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindeblad E, Nilsson S, Gustafson S, et al. Self-concepts and psychological health in children and adolescents with reading difficulties and the impact of assistive technology to compensate and facilitate reading ability. Cogent Psychol. 2019;6(1):1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haßler B, Major L, Hennessy S. Tablet use in schools: a critical review of the evidence for learning outcomes. J Comput Assist Learn. 2016;32(2):139–156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dogan S, Delialioglu O. A systematic review on the use of technology in learning disabilities. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Özel Eğitim Dergisi. 2020;21(3):611–638.
   Google Scholar
• Lenker JA, Harris F, Taugher M, et al. Consumer perspectives on assistive technology outcomes. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2013;8(5):373–380.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Abbott C, Brown D, Evett L, et al. Emerging issues and current trends in assistive technology use 2007–2010: practising, assisting and enabling learning for all. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2014;9(6):453–462.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• de Witte L, Steel E, Gupta S, et al. Assistive technology provision: towards an international framework for assuring availability and accessibility of affordable high-quality assistive technology. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2018;13(5):467–472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Successful qualitative research: a practical guide for beginners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Res Sport Exercise Health. 2019;11(4):589–597.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elwér Å, Fridolfsson I, Samuelsson S, et al. LäSt. Test i läsförståelse, läsning och stavning för åk. Hogrefe; 2016. p. 1–6. Available from: https://hogrefe.se/skoldiagnostik/las-skrivdiagnostik/last/.
   Google Scholar
• Kvale S, Brinkmann S. Den kvalitativa forskningsintervjun [The qualitative research interview]. Lund: studentlitteratur. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Ok MW, Rao K. Digital tools for inclusive classroom: google chrome as assistive and instructional technology. J Spec Educ Technol. 2019;34(3):204–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibby-Leversuch R, Hartwell BK, Wright S. Dyslexia, literacy difficulties and the self-perceptions of children and young people: a systematic review. Curr Psychol. 2021;40(11):5595–5612.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrich R, Mathiassen NE, Hoogerwerf EJ, et al. Service delivery systems for assistive technology in Europe: an AAATE/EASTIN position paper. TAD. 2013;25(3):127–146.
   Google Scholar
• Schock R, Lee EA. Children’s voices: perspectives on using assistive technology. EEI. 2016;26(1):76–94.
   Google Scholar
• Schoen LT, Teddlie C. A new model of school culture: a response to a call for conceptual clarity. Sch Eff Sch Improv. 2008;19(2):129–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sosu E, Ellis S. Closing the attainment gap in Scottish education. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation; 2014. Available from: https://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/default/files/jrf/migrated/files/education-attainment-scotland-full.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Vohs KD, Luce MF. Judgment and decision making. Vol 2. In Finkel EJ, Baumeister RF, editors. Advanced social psychology. The state of the science. New York, USA: Oxford University Press; 2019, p. 453–470.
   Google Scholar
• Pino M, Mortari L. The inclusion of students with dyslexia in higher education: a systematic review using narrative synthesis. Dyslexia. 2014;20(4):346–369.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dos Santos ADP, Ferrari ALM, Medola FO, et al. Aesthetics and the perceived stigma of assistive technology for visual impairment. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2022;17(2):152–158.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindeblad E, Svensson I, Gustafson S. Self-concepts and psychological well-being assessed by Beck Youth Inventory among pupils with reading difficulties. Read Psychol. 2016;37(3):449–469.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan RM, Deci EL. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemp Educ Psychol. 2000;25(1):54–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Broeck A, Ferris DL, Chang CH, et al. A review of self-determination theory’s basic psychological needs at work. J Manag. 2016;42(5):1195–1229.
   Google Scholar
• Ripat JD, Woodgate RL. The importance of assistive technology in the productivity pursuits of young adults with disabilities. Work. 2017;57(4):455–468.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grunér S, Östberg P, Hedenius M. The compensatory effect of text-to-speech technology on reading comprehension and reading rate in Swedish schoolchildren with reading disability: the moderating effect of inattention and hyperactivity symptoms differs by grade groups. J Spec Educ Technol. 2018;33(2):98–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gough PB, Tunmer WE. Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial Spec Educ. 1986;7(1):6–10.
   Google Scholar
• Diakidoy IAN, Stylianou P, Karefillidou C, et al. The relationship between listening and reading comprehension of different types of text at increasing grade levels. Read Psychol. 2005;26(1):55–80.
   Google Scholar
• Moir T, Boyle J, Woolfson LM. Developing higher‐order reading skills in mainstream primary schools: a metacognitive and self‐regulatory approach. Br Educ Res J. 2020;46(2):399–420.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fälth L, Svensson I. An app as 'reading glasses’–a study of the interaction between individual and assistive technology for students with a dyslexic profile. IJoTE. 2015;III(1):1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Hjetland HN, Brinchmann EI, Scherer R, et al. Preschool pathways to reading comprehension: a systematic meta-analytic review. Educ Res Rev. 2020;30:100323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes JR, Berninger VW. Cognitive processes in writing: a framework. In Arfé B, Dockrell J, Berninger V, editors. Writing development in children with hearing loss, dyslexia, or oral language problems: implications for assessment and instruction. New York, USA: Oxford University Press; 2014. p. 3–15.
   Google Scholar
• Bruning R, Dempsey M, Kauffman DF, et al. Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing. J Educ Psychol. 2013;105(1):25–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacArthur CA. Instruction in evaluation and revision. In MacArthur CA, Graham S, Fitzgerald J, editors. Handbook of writing research. New York, USA: The Guilford Press; 2016. p. 272–287.
   Google Scholar
• Regeringskansliet. Nationell digitaliseringsstrategi for skolväsendet (U2017/04119/S); 2017. Available from: https://www.regeringen.se/informationsmaterial/2017/10/regeringen-beslutar-om-nationell-digitaliseringsstrategi-for-skolvasendet/.
   Google Scholar